Article 3
This Decision is addressed to the Kingdom of the Netherlands. Done at Brussels, 25 July 2001. For the Commission Mario Monti Member of the Commission (1) OJ C 233, 14.8.1999, p. 39. (2) OJ C 233, 14.8.1999, p.39. (3) The Commission accepted the reasoning of the Dutch Government that Reebok's alleged preferential rental conditions and its alleged preferential conditions of access to infrastructure facilities in the park should be seen as one measure because the cost of the basic infrastructure is included in the total investment in the park and passed on in the rent. (4) Confidential information. (5) Confidential information. (6) The original figure of 85,2 ha has been slightly adjusted by the Dutch authorities due to the additional terrain originally planned for part of an interconnecting road within the Distripark. (7) Confidential information. (8) Confidential information. (9) A map shows that the standard size of a plot is 3,4 ha but can vary depending on the location within the rectangular or triangular clusters connected by roads. (10) The United Kingdom Government is not the original complainant mentioned previously. (11) ECR [1999] I-2459. (12) Confidential information. (13) Reebok's share of the total costs was calculated on the basis of the proportion of square metres Reebok occupies in Distripark Maasvlakte: 13,2 % of 86,6 ha. (14) Confidential information. (15) Confidential information. (16) It appears that the Dutch authorities in their calculations of the present values of costs and income used discounting rates varying between 5 % and 6 %. The Commission when discounting the figures by a reference rate of 5,95 % (applicable for the Netherlands in the beginning of 1998) arrives at a rather similar result, i.e. a positive net present value of [...] *. Considering that the payment of the rent in general only starts one year after signing the contract, i.e. in Reebok's case in 1999, one could also argue for a reference rate of 4,76 %. However, the Commission takes the view that for the calculation of present values of income and costs, the contract time is decisive. Moreover, if profitability is given with a reference rate of 5,95 %, it is even higher with a lower reference rate. (17) See ECR [1990] I-3083. (18) Weighed by total size per price/m2. (19) Confidential information. (20) Confidential information. (21) Confidential information. (22) Confidential information. (23) For the calculation of the present values the reference rate of 5,95 % was applied.