State aid to banks
Einde inhoudsopgave
State aid to banks (IVOR nr. 109) 2018/9.11:9.11 Conclusion
State aid to banks (IVOR nr. 109) 2018/9.11
9.11 Conclusion
Documentgegevens:
mr. drs. R.E. van Lambalgen, datum 01-12-2017
- Datum
01-12-2017
- Auteur
mr. drs. R.E. van Lambalgen
- JCDI
JCDI:ADS590576:1
- Vakgebied(en)
Financieel recht / Europees financieel recht
Mededingingsrecht / EU-mededingingsrecht
Toon alle voetnoten
Voetnoten
Voetnoten
In particular, section 9.7.2 indicated that the valuation-criterion was not met in the cases of Dunfermline and Quinn Insurance. Section 9.8 indicated that the ‘burden-sharing and remuneration-criterion of the IAC’ was not met in the cases where the transfer value exceeded the real economic value. Section 9.10 provided an overview of cases that did not meet the IAC-criteria.
Deze functie is alleen te gebruiken als je bent ingelogd.
This chapter has given an insight into how the Commission assesses asset relief measures. This assessment is based on the principles of the Impaired Assets Communication (IAC). The IAC is only applicable to asset relief measures. As set out in section 9.3.1, the Commission looks at the effect of the State aid measure: if the aid measure has the effect of an asset relief measure, then it falls within the scope of the IAC. Consequently, the fact that the measure has the effect of relieving the bank from its impaired assets, is a relevant characteristic, because it means that the measure will be assessed on the basis of the IAC- criteria.
Asset relief measures are authorised by the Commission when they comply with the IAC-criteria. The fact that an asset relief measure complies with the IAC- criteria is thus a relevant characteristic. In this chapter, the relevant characteristics are presented as the fact that one of the IAC-criteria is met. For instance, the fact that the ‘valuation-criterion’ of the IAC has been met, is a relevant characteristic. Since there are five IAC-criteria, there are also five relevant characteristics.
Has the Commission consistently taken into account these five relevant characteristics? In other words: has the Commission consistently assessed whether the five IAC-criteria have been met? This chapter has shown that this is indeed the case. In every case that involved asset relief measures, the Commission applied the five IAC-criteria. This chapter also showed that the asset relief measures did not always meet the IAC-criteria.1 However, these asset relief measures were still approved by the Commission, because the non-compliance with the IAC-criteria was compensated for by far-reaching restructuring.
The principle that a lack of adequate own contribution has to be reflected in the need for far-reaching restructuring will be touched upon again in the following chapter. That chapter focusses on the characteristics that are relevant to the Commission’s assessment of whether far-reaching restructuring is required.