13.3.2004   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

CE 65/138

1.

Given that the stamp duty exemption scheme introduced by the United Kingdom is said to extend to 23 per cent of the UK population, and nearly half of the coverage falls outside the regional aid map, will the Commission state why it thought that the geographical coverage of the stamp duty exemption is compatible with the regional aid guidelines?

2.

Will the Commission describe why it feels that the Canary Wharf financial centre in London is a disadvantaged area for the purposes of state aid?

1.

The Commission would like to refer the Honourable Member to the relevant paragraphs in the Commission Decision 2003/433/EC of 21 January 2003 on the aid scheme ‘Stamp duty exemption for non-residential properties in disadvantaged areas’ notified by the United Kingdom (1), in particular points 38 to 41 (under the heading ‘Compatibility with Regional Aid Guidelines’) and points 42 to 45 (under the heading ‘Compatibility with the Deprived Urban Area Guidelines’).

Firstly in the paragraphs following the heading ‘Compatibility with Regional Aid Guidelines’, the Commission acknowledges that the regional aid map for the United Kingdom is not based on NUTS III areas but on the concept of job opportunity zones each of which has a population in excess of 100 000. It follows that, in contrast, the areas targeted by the Stamp Duty Exemption are isolated, micro-spatial areas. Paragraph 41 ends the heading by providing that: ‘the United Kingdom authorities agree that the Guidelines on national regional aid do not apply to the Stamp Duty Exemption even though many of the selected disadvantaged wards do form part of the regional aid map.’

Secondly, following the paragraphs under the heading ‘Compatibility with Deprived Urban Area Guidelines’, the Commission notice on the expiry of the guidelines on State aid for undertakings in deprived urban areas constitutes the initial legal basis for its assessment. Following this notice ‘failure to extend the guidelines (the guidelines on State aid for undertakings in deprived urban areas had expired in the course of the procedure), does not imply that State aid for deprived areas is no longer possible and depending on the specific circumstances of the proposed aid in question, it may be approved directly upon the basis of Article 87(3)(c) of the Treaty. Accordingly, the Commission will examine such cases in the light of Community objectives.’ Thus, the Commission analysed the scheme both in the light of the Community's objectives and its effect on competition and trade.

2.

The Commission would like to refer the Honourable Member to point 10 of the above-mentioned Commission Decision under the heading ‘description of the aid.’ Following these paragraphs, the geographical units covered in England are electoral wards or divisions selected on the basis of the indices of deprivation used by the United Kingdom. In the same way as pockets of deprivation may exist in prosperous regions not included in the regional aid map, one may find attractive spots in the most deprived wards of the United Kingdom.

Point 10 of the Commission Decision also refers to the commitment of the United Kingdom of keeping qualifying areas under review. In addition, the submission of detailed reports in order to evaluate the implementation of the scheme is one of the conditions imposed by the Commission in its Decision of 21 January 2003. Article 3 provides as follows: ‘The United Kingdom shall submit annual reports on the operation of the scheme to the Commission. The degree of detail of the reports shall be such as to allow an evaluation of the effect of the scheme on the physical regeneration areas that benefit from it.’