2003/225/EC: Commission Decision of 19 June 2002 on the programme of the Land of Thuringia for investments by small and medium-sized enterprises and its implementation (notified under document number C(2002) 2143) (Text with EEA relevance)
Data as of 2026-07-04 Β· Compiled from an official source version. Later amendments or repeals may not be reflected; the official text prevails. Β· Read the official text β
The programme of the Land of Thuringia for investment in SMEs (hereinafter referred to as "the scheme") constitutes State aid within the meaning of Article 87(1) of the EC Treaty. The application of the scheme in breach of its provisions is unlawful.
Insofar as firms in difficulty were aided, the aid scheme and all the relevant individual grants of aid are incompatible with the common market. Insofar as it promoted initial investment by economically healthy firms, the aid scheme and all the relevant individual grants of aid are compatible with the common market, provided that the maximum intensities specified in Article 3 are not exceeded. That part of the aid which exceeds the permitted maximum intensity is incompatible with the common market.
Where it is combined with other regional aid, the aid for initial investment must not exceed the maximum intensity of 35 % gross for large firms and 50 % gross for SMEs.
Germany shall take all necessary measures to recover from the beneficiaries the illegally granted aid referred to in Article 2. Recovery shall be effected without delay and in accordance with national procedures, provided that they allow the immediate and effective execution of this Decision. The aid to be recovered shall include interest from the date on which the unlawful aid was at the disposal of the beneficiaries until the date of its recovery. Interest shall be calculated on the basis of the reference rate used for calculating the grant equivalent of regional aid.
Germany shall inform the Commission, within two months of notification of this Decision, of the measures taken to comply with it.
This Decision is addressed to the Federal Republic of Germany. Done at Brussels, 19 June 2002. For the Commission Mario Monti Member of the Commission (1) OJ C 73, 17.3.1999, p. 10. (2) OJ C 335, 10.12.1993, p. 7 - Aid N 408/93 - SG(93) D/19245 of 26.11.1993. (3) OJ C 364, 20.12.1994, p. 7 - Aid N 480/94 - SG(94) D/14255 of 10.10.1994. (4) Aid NN 142/97 - SG(98) D/04313 of 2.6.1998. (5) Case C - 47/91 Italian Republic v Commission [1994] ECR I-4635. (6) SG(98) D/11285. (7) Loc. cit. (see footnote 1). (8) OJ C 213, 19.8.1992, p. 8. (9) According to the letter of 5 March 1999, in which Germany corrected the number of cases stated in the annual reports for 1994 and 1996. (10) I.e. up to 8.4.1998, the date on which the aid scheme in its amended version was approved. (11) A number of the firms receiving aid under the scheme are currently being examined by the Commission. (12) OJ C 373, 29.12.1994, p. 3 - Aid N 464/1993 (for the period 1994 to 1996). (13) According to the letter sent by the German authorities on 26 September 2001, only 27 firms were still operating in 2001, four of which are to be regarded as firms in difficulty and 23 as healthy. (14) This firm received aid twice under the scheme. (15) This firm was initially on the list of firms in difficulty. In its letter of 26 September 2001, Germany corrected the list and stated that Kahla was to be regarded as an economically healthy firm at the time the aid was granted. This individual case is currently the subject of proceedings under Article 88(2) of the EC Treaty (C 62/2000), and the present Decision is without prejudice to the decision which the Commission will take on the case. (16) See footnote 15. (17) OJ L 83, 27.3.1999, p. 1. (18) Case 248/84 Germany v Commission [1987] ECR 4013, paragraph 17 et seq.; Case C-47/91 Italy v Commission [1994] ECR 1-4635, paragraph 20 et seq.; Case C-75/97 Belgium v Commission [1999] ECR 1-3671, paragraph 48; Joined Cases C-15/98 and C-105/99 Italy and Sardinia Lines v Commission [2000] ECR I-8855, paragraph 51. (19) Aid N 464/93 - SG(94)D/1551 of 4.2.1994 (OJ C 373, 29.12.1994, p. 3). (20) In any case, the application of the currently applicable rules on regional aid would not result in any more favourable assessment of the recipients than application of the rules contained in this Decision. (21) OJ C 119, 22.5.2002, p. 22. (22) OJ C 212, 12.8.1988, p. 2. (23) OJ C 31, 3.2.1979, p. 9. (24) The Commission changed this practice when in 1999 it adopted the guidelines on State aid for rescuing and restructuring firms in difficulty (OJ C 288, 9.10.1999, p. 2) and proposed appropriate measures under Article 88(1) of the EC Treaty. Since then, any investment aid for a large firm in difficulty has had to be notified individually. (25) See page 21 of the guidelines on national regional aid. The examination relates particularly to determining the strict minimum necessary to allow the viability of the firm to be restored; in this respect, any investment aid granted under a restructuring project must be regarded as forming part of the total aid, and the aid as a whole must not exceed the strict minimum necessary for restoring viability. (26) OJ C 368, 23.12.1994, p. 2. (27) Most of which have since declared bankruptcy.
Source: EUR-Lex (Publications Office of the EU), Β© European Union, reuse permitted under Commission Decision 2011/833/EU.