97/241/EC: Commission Decision of 5 June 1996 concerning aid that the Republic of Austria intends to grant pursuant to the ERP Eastern Europe programme (Only the German text is authentic) (Text with EEA relevance)

• Articles: 5

Article 1

The aid which the Republic of Austria intends to grant, under the ERP East European programme, to small and medium-sized enterprises, within the meaning of the Commission recommendation of 3 April 1996 concerning the definition of small and medium-sized enterprises, is compatible with the common market pursuant to Article 92 (3) (c) of the EC Treaty and Article 61 (3) (c) of the EEA Agreement.

Article 2

Any aid which the Republic of Austria intends to grant pursuant to the scheme referred to in Article 1 to enterprises not qualifying as small and medium-sized enterprises as defined by the Commission recommendation of 3 April 1996 concerning the definition of small and medium-sized enterprises shall be notified individually pursuant to Article 93 (3) of the EC Treaty.

Any aid which the Republic of Austria intends to grant to small and medium-sized enterprises, which is based on eligible costs differing from those usually accepted by the Commission for investment aid for SMEs as referred to under point 4.1 of the SME guidelines and the principles of coordination of regional aid systems and which, calculated on the basis of the eligible costs accepted by the Commission, leads to an aid intensity exceeding 15 % for small enterprises and 7,5 % for medium-sized enterprises shall be notified individually pursuant to Article 93 (3) of the EC Treaty.

Article 3

The Austrian Government is requested to submit to the Commission an annual report on the application of the scheme.

Article 4

The Austrian Government is reminded that the application of this scheme is subject to the rules on the cumulation of aid, whether such cumulation involves aid for different purposes (15) or aid for the same purpose under schemes adopted by the same entity or by different entities (central, regional and/or local). In the latter case, the maximum ceiling authorized for the scheme referred to in Article 1 must not be exceeded.

Furthermore, the Austrian Government is reminded that it must observe the Community rules and regulations applicable concerning certain sectors of industry, i.e. sectors covered by the ECSC Treaty, transport, fisheries and agriculture, including the processing and marketing of agricultural products (16).

Article 5

This Decision is addressed to the Republic of Austria.

Done at Brussels, 5 June 1996.

For the Commission

Hans VAN DEN BROEK

Member of the Commission

(1) OJ No C 71, 9. 3. 1996, p. 9.

(2) Case C 50/95 (ex N 317/95), OJ No C 71, 9. 3. 1996, p. 6.

(3) OJ No C 213, 19. 8. 1992, p. 2.

(4) Council Regulation (EEC) No 3906/89 of 18 December 1989 on economic aid to the Republic of Hungary and the Polish People's Republic (OJ No L 375, 23. 12. 1989, p. 11).

(5) Common position (EC) No 6/95 adopted by the Council on 22 May 1995 with a view to adopting a Council Regulation on the implementation of the European Communities investment partners Financial Instrument for the countries of Latin America, Asia, the Mediterranean region and South Africa (OJ No C 160, 26. 6. 1995, p. 8).

(6) See point 25 (11) of Procedural and Substantive Rules in the Field of State Aid (Guidelines issued by the EFTA Surveillance Authority) (OJ No L 231, 3. 9. 1994, p. 57).

(7) Case C-142/87, Belgium v. Commission ('Tubemeuse`) [1990] ECR I-959, paragraph 35.

(8) OJ No C 68, 9. 3. 1996, p. 9.

(9) Case C-142/87, Belgium v. Commission ('Tubemeuse`) [1990] ECR I-959, paragraphs 38 to 40.

(10) OJ No C 31, 3. 2. 1979, p. 9.

(11) COM(95) 42 final, p. 5.

(12) SI (95) 1000, p. 14.

(13) See for example Article 6 of the proposal for the conclusion of a Cooperation Agreement with Nepal, (OJ No C 338, 16. 12. 1995, p. 10), and Article 12 of the proposal for the conclusion of an Interregional Framework Cooperation Agreement with the Southern Cone Common Market and its Member Countries (Argentina, Brazil, Paraguay, Uruguay), (OJ No C 14, 19. 1. 1996, p. 4).

(14) OJ No L 107, 30. 4. 1996, p. 4.

(15) OJ No C 3, 5. 1. 1985, p. 2.

(16) OJ No C 29, 2. 2. 1996, p. 4.