13.9.1 Why is this a relevant characteristic?

The acquisition ban1 is an important behavioural restriction that is imposed on many beneficiary banks. Roughly speaking, an acquisition ban means that the beneficiary bank shall not acquire any stake in any undertaking.

A restructuring plan is based on three pillars and the acquisition ban is important for two of these pillars: i.e. the second pillar (own contribution) and the third pillar (minimizing competition distortions). That the acquisition ban is important for two pillars if reflected by the fact that the acquisition ban is mentioned in two different places in the Restructuring Communication.

In the context of the second pillar, point 23 of the Restructuring Communication provides that the restructuring aid should be limited to covering costs which are necessary for the restoration of viability. In this context, the Commission welcomes acquisition bans. The Commission considers that an acquisition ban “gives additional assurance that the restructuring plan and costs will be focused on restoring the viability of the core existing activities and that the bank will not use its own resources or the State support for external growth”. This consideration – in these exact wordings – can be found in many decisions.2

In the context of the third pillar, point 40 of the Restructuring Communication provides that State aid should not be used for the acquisition of competing businesses. In many decisions, the Commission considered that the acquisition ban prevented the beneficiary bank from using the State aid to purchase competitors or to grow externally at the expense of other financial institutions.3 Another formulation is: “the acquisition ban ensures that the State aid will not be used to take over competitors, but that it will instead serve its intended purpose, namely to restore the beneficiary bank’s viability”.4 In one of its decisions, the Commission underlined that the acquisition ban prevents the bank from growing inorganically.5