COMMISSION DECISION
of 29 June 2011
on State aid granted by France to the Institut Français du Pétrole (Case C 35/08 (ex NN 11/08))
(notified under document C(2011) 4483)
(Only the French text is authentic)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2012/26/EU)
1
PROCEDURE
2
THE IFP GROUP
3
DESCRIPTION OF THE MEASURE
4
REASONS FOR INITIATING THE FORMAL INVESTIGATION PROCEDURE
5
OBSERVATIONS AND PROPOSALS PUT FORWARD BY THE FRENCH AUTHORITIES
5.1
INITIAL OBSERVATIONS BY THE FRENCH AUTHORITIES
5.1.1 THERE IS NO GUARANTEE IMPUTABLE TO THE STATE INVOLVING A TRANSFER OF STATE RESOURCES
A.
No unlimited State guarantee
B.
Flawed Commission argument
(34)
a)
The reimbursement of individual claims is not guaranteed
b)
The continued existence of IFP or of its obligations is not guaranteed
5.1.2 NO ADVANTAGE IS CONFERRED ON IFP OR ITS SUBSIDIARIES
5.2
PROPOSALS BY THE FRENCH AUTHORITIES
5.2.1 CLARIFICATION OF THE DECREE IMPLEMENTING THE LAW OF 16 JULY 1980
5.2.2 INCORPORATION OF A REFERENCE SPELLING OUT THE ABSENCE OF A GUARANTEE IN IFP’S CONTRACTS INVOLVING A CLAIM
5.2.3 INCORPORATION OF A REFERENCE SPELLING OUT THE ABSENCE OF A GUARANTEE IN THE FINANCING CONTRACTS OF IFP’S SUBSIDIARIES AXENS, BEICIP-FRANLAB AND PROSERNAT
5.3
ADDITIONAL OBSERVATIONS FROM THE FRENCH AUTHORITIES
6
COMMENTS FROM THIRD PARTIES AND FROM THE FRENCH AUTHORITIES
6.1
OBSERVATIONS FROM UOP
6.1.1 MARKET PERCEPTION OF IFP/AXENS
6.1.2 THE ADVANTAGES CONFERRED BY THE EPIC STATUS
6.2
COMMENTS FROM THE FRENCH AUTHORITIES ON UOP’S OBSERVATIONS
6.2.1 ‘IFP/AXENS’ IS NOT A STATE BODY WITH UNLIMITED RESOURCES
6.2.2 AXENS DOES NOT DERIVE ANY ADVANTAGE ON THE MARKET FROM IFP’S EPIC STATUS
6.2.2.1
The relations between Axens and its customers
6.2.2.2
The relations between Axens and its suppliers and the funding terms on the financial markets
7
ASSESSMENT
7.1
EXISTENCE OF STATE AID WITHIN THE MEANING OF ARTICLE 107(1) TFEU
7.1.1 USE OF STATE RESOURCES IN THE FORM OF AN UNLIMITED GUARANTEE
7.1.1.1
Unlimited State guarantee to IFP conferred by its EPIC status
A.
Guarantee of payment of individual claims
a)
Rejection of the arguments of the French authorities
b)
A creditor of IFP can be sure that his claim will be repaid.
B.
Guarantee of the continued existence of IFP and/or of its obligations
C.
Conclusion regarding the existence of a State guarantee in favour of IFP
7.1.1.2
The unlimited guarantee does not cover IFP’s private-law subsidiaries
A.
Creditors of IFP’s subsidiaries have no guarantee of payment of their individual claims
a)
Compulsory winding up under ordinary law
b)
No guarantee mechanism for IFP’s private-law subsidiaries
i)
No general vicarious liability of a shareholder for its subsidiary
α)
Denial by the parent of the legal personality of the subsidiary
β)
Liability for mismanagement of the subsidiary by the parent
ii)
Recent plans for reform of vicarious liability
‘Article 1355
‘Article 1360
B.
Creditors of IFP’s subsidiaries have no guarantee of the continued existence of the subsidiaries and/or their obligations
C.
Conclusion regarding the lack of a State guarantee covering the private-law subsidiaries of the publicly owned establishment IFP
7.1.2 ECONOMIC NATURE OF THE ACTIVITIES OF THE PUBLICLY OWNED ESTABLISHMENT IFP THAT ARE COVERED BY THE UNLIMITED GUARANTEE
7.1.3 SCOPE OF THE PRESENT DECISION
7.1.4 EXISTENCE OF A SELECTIVE ADVANTAGE TO THE IFP GROUP
7.1.4.1
Advantages to the publicly owned establishment IFP
A.
No advantage in dealings with banks and financial institutions
Entity: |
IFP |
2005 |
2006 |
2007 |
2008 |
2009 |
2010 |
EUR thousand |
EUR thousand |
EUR thousand |
EUR thousand |
EUR thousand |
EUR thousand |
||
Loans and debts with credit institutions(197) |
Amounts payable within one year (1) |
[…](197) |
[…](197) |
[…](197) |
[…](197) |
[…](197) |
[…](197) |
Amounts payable at over one year |
[…](197) |
[…](197) |
[…](197) |
[…](197) |
[…](197) |
[…](197) |
|
|
|||||||
(1) of which bank loans and overdrafts and bank credit balances |
[…](197) |
[…](197) |
[…](197) |
[…](197) |
[…](197) |
[…](197) |
Interest rate on loans and debts contracted with credit institutions: |
2005 |
2006 |
2007 |
2008 |
2009 |
2010 |
|
Interest rate + margin |
Interest rate + margin |
Interest rate + margin |
Interest rate + margin |
Interest rate + margin |
Interest rate + margin |
||
Medium and long-term loans |
[…](197) |
[…](197) |
[…](197) |
[…](197) |
[…](197) |
[…](197) |
[…](197) |
Bank loans and overdrafts and short-term credit facilities |
[Bank No 1](198) |
EONIA + […](197) |
EONIA + […](197) |
|
|
|
|
[Bank No 2](198) |
|
|
EONIA + […](197) |
EONIA + […](197) |
|
|
|
[Bank No 3](198) |
|
|
|
|
EONIA + […](197) |
|
|
[Bank No 4](198) |
|
|
|
|
|
EONIA + […](197) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
B.
Advantage in dealings with suppliers
Year |
Number of suppliers concerned |
Payments to factors (in euros) |
Number of invoices concerned |
2004 |
[…] (*) |
[…] (*) |
[…] (*) |
2005 |
[…] (*) |
[…] (*) |
[…] (*) |
2006 |
[…] (*) |
[…] (*) |
[…] (*) |
2007 |
[…] (*) |
[…] (*) |
[…] (*) |
2008 |
[…] (*) |
[…] (*) |
[…] (*) |
2009 |
[…] (*) |
[…] (*) |
[…] (*) |
2010(203) |
[…] (*) |
[…] (*) |
[…] (*) |
Period as a whole (2004-2010) |
|
[…] (*) |
[…] (*) |
C.
Advantage in dealings with customers
(EUR thousand) |
|||
Total |
Total charges |
Total own resources |
Public resources (+) or benefit (–) |
2007 |
[…] (*) |
[…] (*) |
[…] (*) |
2008 |
[…] (*) |
[…] (*) |
[…] (*) |
2009 |
[…] (*) |
[…] (*) |
[…] (*) |
(EUR thousand) |
|||
Total |
Total charges |
Total own resources |
Public resources (+) or benefit (–) |
2007 |
[…] (*) |
[…] (*) |
[…] (*) |
2008 |
[…] (*) |
[…] (*) |
[…] (*) |
2009 |
[…] (*) |
[…] (*) |
[…] (*) |
|
2006 |
2007 |
2008 |
2009 |
||||
Research services (outside the exclusive fields of the subsidiaries) |
Turnover (EUR million) |
Upper bound(215) (insurance premium) |
Turnover (EUR million) |
Upper bound (insurance premium) |
Turnover (EUR million) |
Upper bound (insurance premium) |
Turnover (EUR million) |
Upper bound (insurance premium) |
On behalf of subsidiaries |
[…] (*) |
EUR […] (*) |
[…] (*) |
EUR […] (*) |
[…] (*) |
EUR […] (*) |
[…] (*) |
EUR […] (*) |
On behalf of third parties |
[…] (*) |
EUR […] (*) |
[…] (*) |
EUR […] (*) |
[…] (*) |
EUR […] (*) |
[…] (*) |
EUR […] (*) |
Administrative services provided |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Invoicing of staff provided |
[…] (*) |
EUR […] (*) |
[…] (*) |
EUR […] (*) |
[…] (*) |
EUR […] (*) |
[…] (*) |
EUR […] (*) |
Invoicing of premises and ancillary services |
[…] (*) |
EUR […] (*) |
[…] (*) |
EUR […] (*) |
[…] (*) |
EUR […] (*) |
[…] (*) |
EUR […] (*) |
Services in the exclusive field of Axens |
[…] (*) |
EUR […] (*) million |
[…] (*) |
EUR […] (*) million |
[…] (*) |
EUR […] (*) million |
[…] (*) |
EUR […] (*) million |
Services in the exclusive field of Prosernat |
[…] (*) |
EUR […] (*) |
[…] (*) |
EUR […] (*) |
[…] (*) |
EUR […] (*) |
[…] (*) |
EUR […] (*) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total for the subsidiaries |
[…] (*) |
EUR […] (*) million |
[…] (*) |
EUR […] (*) million |
[…] (*) |
EUR […] (*) million |
[…] (*) |
EUR […] (*) million |
Total for third parties |
[…] (*) |
EUR […] (*) |
[…] (*) |
EUR […] (*) |
[…] (*) |
EUR […] (*) |
[…] (*) |
EUR […] (*) |
7.1.4.2
Advantages transferred to the private-law subsidiaries of the IFP group
7.1.5 DISTORTION OF COMPETITION AND EFFECT ON TRADE
7.1.6 CONCLUSION REGARDING THE NATURE OF THE AID MEASURE
7.2
UNLAWFULNESS OF THE AID MEASURE
7.3
COMPATIBILITY OF THE AID MEASURE
7.3.1 AID IN THE FIELD OF CONTRACT RESEARCH AND SERVICES PROVIDED BY THE PUBLICLY OWNED ESTABLISHMENT IFP
7.3.1.1
Possible transfer of State aid to third parties or subsidiaries
7.3.1.2
Compatibility of a State guarantee conferred on a research organisation for the performance of contract research services and services ancillary to its principal objective of independent public research
7.3.2 AID TO THE IFP GROUP IN THE EXCLUSIVE FIELDS OF ACTIVITY OF AXENS AND PROSERNAT
7.3.2.1
Basis for the examination of the compatibility of the aid
7.3.2.2
Research stages
7.3.2.3
Eligible costs
7.3.2.4
Intensity of the aid
(EUR million) |
||||||
|
2006 |
2007 |
2008 |
2009 |
||
Annual cost of technical feasibility studies (EUR million) |
||||||
Area of activity IFP/Axens |
[…] (*) |
[…] (*) |
[…] (*) |
[…] (*) |
||
Area of activity IFP/Prosernat |
[…] (*) |
[…] (*) |
[…] (*) |
[…] (*) |
||
Total |
7,4 |
3,5 |
0,9 |
0,9 |
||
Annual cost of industrial research work (EUR million) |
||||||
Area of activity IFP/Axens |
[…] (*) |
[…] (*) |
[…] (*) |
[…] (*) |
||
Area of activity IFP/Prosernat |
[…] (*) |
[…] (*) |
[…] (*) |
[…] (*) |
||
Total |
49,0 |
45,5 |
52,8 |
55,2 |
||
Own resources (EUR million) |
||||||
Amount |
[…] (*) |
[…] (*) |
[…] (*) |
[…] (*) |
||
Annual State aid (EUR million) |
||||||
Amount of public funding(249) |
11,3 |
6,4 |
7,7 |
11,1 |
||
Upper bound to the impact of the guarantee in dealings between IFP and its suppliers |
[…] (*) |
[…] (*) |
[…] (*) |
[…] (*) |
||
Upper bound to the impact of the guarantee in dealings between IFP and its customers(250) |
[…] (*) |
[…] (*) |
[…] (*) |
[…] (*) |
||
|
[…] (*) |
[…] (*) |
[…] (*) |
[…] (*) |
||
|
[…] (*) |
[…] (*) |
[…] (*) |
[…] (*) |
||
Maximum amount of public funding (including the upper bound to the impact of the guarantee) |
13,1 |
9,8 |
11,3 |
14,7 |
||
Intensity of the aid (net of upper bound to the impact of the guarantee) |
20,0 % |
13,0 % |
14,3 % |
19,8 % |
||
Upper bound to the intensity of the aid (including upper bound to the impact of the guarantee) |
23,2 % |
20,0 % |
21,0 % |
26,2 % |
||
Maximum permissible intensity(251) |
|
|
|
|
||
|
53 % |
51,8 % |
50,4 % |
50,4 % |
||
|
— |
51,1 % |
50,3 % |
50,2 % |
7.3.2.5
Cumulation
7.3.2.6
Incentive effect
Progression of the indicators |
IFP/Axens |
IFP/Prosernat |
||||
|
2007/2003 |
2008/2003 |
2009/2003 |
2007/2003 |
2008/2003 |
2009/2003 |
Expenditure allocated to R&D in the exclusive field |
[…] (*) |
[…] (*) |
[…] (*) |
[…] (*) |
[…] (*) |
[…] (*) |
Staff allocated to R&D in the exclusive field |
[…] (*) |
[…] (*) |
[…] (*) |
[…] (*) |
[…] (*) |
[…] (*) |