14.3.2 Implications for the Commission

In my opinion, the fact that it cannot be excluded that the Commission has favoured certain banks, is problematic for the Commission. Indeed, the mere impression that the Commission has treated some banks unfairly could be detrimental to the public support for the Commission’s State aid control. For that reason, the Commission should be concerned with avoiding the impression that it has treated banks unfairly. The best way to avoid creating such an impression is by treating State aid cases consistently.

In that regard, it should be recalled that the Commission has shown that it is concerned with treating cases consistently. As discussed in section 6.7.3, the Commission explicitly refers to other cases in order to demonstrate that the decision is in line with its previous decisional practice. This illustrates that the Commission is concerned with treating cases consistently.

As submitted in this PhD-study, the only way in which bank State aid cases can be treated consistently, is by using the ‘relevant-characteristics approach’. In the first place, the Commission should asses in every bank State aid case whether the relevant characteristics are present in that case. In other words: the relevant characteristics should be consistently used as assessment criteria. In the second place, the relevant characteristics should be elaborated in a consistent manner.