97/811/EC: Commission Decision of 9 April 1997 concerning aid granted by France to the textile, clothing, leather and footwear industries (Only the French text is authentic) (Text with EEA relevance)

• Articles: 4

Article 1

The reduction in employers' social security contributions introduced under the 'textile plan` by Article 99 of Law No 93-314 of 12 April 1996 implementing various economic and financial provisions and by Decree No 96-572 of 27 June 1996 on the degressive reduction of employers' social security contributions in firms in the textile, clothing, leather and footwear industries is, as regards the part not covered by the 'de minimis` rule, illegal aid in that it was implemented before the Commission had taken a decision on it, in accordance with the provisions of Article 93 (3) of the Treaty.

As regards the part not covered by the 'de minimis` rule, which set a threshold of ECU 100 000 over three years, the aid is also incompatible with the common market in accordance with the provisions of Article 92 (1) of the Treaty and Article 61 (1) of the EEA Agreement and does not qualify for any of the derogations provided for in Article 92 (2) and (3) of the Treaty and Article 61 (2) and (3) of the EEA Agreement.

Article 2

France shall take the appropriate measures to terminate forthwith the granting of the reduction referred to in Article 1 in so far as the total amount of the reduction is not covered by the 'de minimus` rule referred to in that section.

France shall take the appropriate measures to ensure the recovery of the aid illegally granted within the meaning of Article 1. Recovery shall be carried out in accordance with the procedures and provisions of French law, with interest until the date of actual repayment, calculated at a rate equal to the percentage value on such date of the reference rate used to calculate the net grant equivalent of regional aid in France.

Article 3

France shall inform the Commission, within two months of the date of notification of this Decision, of the measures taken to comply therewith.

Article 4

This Decision is addressed to the French Republic.

Done at Brussels, 9 April 1997.

For the Commission

Karel VAN MIERT

Member of the Commission

(1) OJ C 206, 17. 7. 1996, p. 8.

(2) OJ C 334, 12. 12. 1995, p. 4.

(3) OJ C 357, 26. 11. 1996, p. 5.

(4) See footnote 1.

(5) See footnote 3.

(6) It is surprising to note that the average firm for each of the categories of firms concerned employs an identical number of workers in both textiles and clothing and in leather and footwear. The Commission also notes that the data on the workforce allocated to production are different in textiles and clothing, which should normally give a different estimate of the cost of reorganizing working time.

(7) Since the data on the workforce allocated to production are not available for the footwear industry, the Commission does not see how the estimated cost of reorganizing working time could have been calculated for that industry.

(8) Source: Eurostat.

(9) Statistics provided by the Association Textiles de France, 22 July 1996.

(10) Source, L'industrie textile, No 1208, October 1996.

(11) OJ C 146, 14. 5. 1997, p. 6.

(12) OJ C 1, 3. 1. 1997, p. 10.

(13) Judgment of the Court of Justice of the European Communities of 26 September 1996 in Case C-241/94 France v. Commission (Kimberly Clark Sopalin), not yet reported. [1996] ECR I-4551.

(14) Furthermore, in its Decision 80/932/EEC of 15 September 1980 concerning the partial taking-over by the State of employers' contributions to sickness insurance schemes in Italy (OJ L 264, 8. 10. 1980, p. 28), the Commission established that, although the general conditions under which undertakings are operating may well vary from one Community country to another, this does not entitle a Member State to single out any specific factor and offset by aid the additional costs borne by its undertakings as compared with their competitors in other Member States.

(15) Judgment of the Court of Justice of the European Communities of 15 March 1994 in Case C-387/92 Banco Exterior de España [1994] ECR I-877.

(16) Judgment of the Court of Justice of the European Communities of 2 July 1974 in Case C-173/73 Italy v. Commission [1974] ECR 709.

(17) See footnote 14.

(18) OJ L 231, 12. 9. 1996, p. 23.

(19) See footnote 16.

(20) This has the effect of mitigating the effects of the measures described and does not give a true picture of the real situation for the French firms concerned.

(21) Journal du textile No 1472, 28. 10. 1996.

(22) Le Monde, 25. 1. 1997.

(23) Guidelines, point 22.

(24) OJ C 1, 3. 1. 1997, p. 10.

(25) OJ C 68, 6. 3. 1996, p. 9.