11.9.2003EN Official Journal of the European Union C 216/3 EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AREA EFTA SURVEILLANCE AUTHORITY STATE AID (SAM 030.95010 — Norway) (2003/C 216/03) EFTA Surveillance Authority notice pursuant to Article 1(2) of Protocol 3 of the Surveillance and Court Agreement, to other EFTA States, EU Member States and interested parties regarding proposed state aid in the form of regionally differentiated social security contributions and direct transport (State aid SAM 030.95010) By means of Decision No 141/03/COL of 16 July 2003, the EFTA Surveillance Authority initiated proceedings pursuant to Article 1(2) of Protocol 3 of the Surveillance and Court Agreement. The Norwegian Government has been informed by means of a copy of the decision. I. FACTS By letter from the Mission of Norway to the European Union dated 10 June 2003 (Doc. No 03-3707 A), forwarding a letter from the Ministry of Finance dated 5 June 2003, both received 1. Notification and registered by the Authority on 11 June 2003, the By letter from the Mission of Norway to the European Union Norwegian authorities submitted additional comments and dated 26 March 2003 (Doc. No 03-1846 A), forwarding a information. letter from the Ministry of Trade and Industry dated 25 March 2003, a letter from the Ministry of Finance dated 25 By letter from the Mission of Norway to the European Union March 2003, and a letter from the Ministry of Local dated 19 June 2003 (Doc. No 03-3976 A), forwarding a letter Government and Regional Development dated 25 March from the Ministry of Trade and Industry dated 10 June 2003, 2003, all received and registered by the Authority on 26 both received and registered by the Authority on 20 June March 2003, the Norwegian authorities notified a transitional 2003, the Norwegian authorities submitted a survey of extra period for the regionally differentiated social security transport costs in the proposed area for transport aid (1). contributions in certain geographical areas (zones 3 and 4) and a new national direct transport aid scheme. The Norwegian authorities also informed the Authority that they By letter from the Norwegian Ambassador to the European would notify later, in a separate letter, a continuation of the Union dated 4 July 2003 (Doc. No 03-4403 A), the present scheme in zone 5 (Nord-Troms and Finnmark). Norwegian authorities withdrew the notification of the Furthermore, the Norwegian authorities informed the continuation of the differentiated social security contributions Authority that they have approached the other EFTA States in zone 5, as a result of the decision of the Standing in order to reach a common accord, pursuant to Article 1(2) Committee of the EFTA States of 1 July 2003 (No 2/2003/SC). subparagraph 3 of Protocol 3 to the Surveillance and Court The Standing Committee decided that the present scheme in Agreement, in order to retain the current scheme in this zone. zone 5 is compatible with the functioning of the EEA Agreement due to the exceptional circumstances in this zone. By letter from the Mission of Norway to the European Union dated 15 April 2003 (Doc. No 03-2467 A), forwarding a letter from the Ministry of Trade and Industry dated 10 April 2003 2. Background and a letter from the Ministry of Finance dated 10 April 2003, On 22 September 1999 the Authority approved a proposal all received and registered by the Authority on 16 April 2003, from the Norwegian authorities concerning new regulations the Norwegian authorities notified a continuation of regionally in the regionally differentiated social security contributions differentiated social security contributions in Nord-Troms and scheme (2). The approval was limited in time, not going Finnmark (zone 5) without any specified time limits. beyond 31 December 2003. By letter dated 16 May 2003 (Doc. No 03-2951 D), the (1) ‘Interju av industribedrifter i aktuelle transportstøttesoner og i refer- Authority acknowledged the receipt of the above letters and ansesoner. Transportøkonomisk institutt. Arbeidsdokument av requested additional information. The Competition and State 4.6.2003’. Aid Directorate also expressed doubts about the compatibility (2) Dec. No 228/99/COL. OJ C 3, 6.1.2000, p. 3, and EEA Supplement of the notified aid measures. No 1, 6.1.2000. C 216/4EN Official Journal of the European Union 11.9.2003 On 21 December 2000 the European Commission took a of the State Aid Guidelines. In the operative part of the negative decision concerning a reduced social contributions Decision it is i.a. stated: aid scheme notified by Sweden (3). In the decision it is stated that: ‘The amount of aid granted under the scheme to an eligible undertaking does not bear any relation to the additional transport costs actually incurred by that particular undertaking. ‘1. The EFTA Surveillance Authority proposes to Norway, on The aid granted depends on the size of its wage bill, which the basis of Article 1(1) of Protocol 3 to the Surveillance depends in turn on the number of persons employed and their and Court Agreement, the following appropriate measures average salaries. It can therefore scarcely be argued that the aid with regard to the State aid involved in the system of is “objectively quantifiable in advance on the basis of an regionally differentiated social security tax (“Geografisk aid-per-kilometre ratio or on the basis of an aid-per-kilometre differensiert arbeidsgiveravgift”): and an aid-per-unit-weight ratio”. The implication is also that it cannot be excluded that there is overcompensation of the additional transport costs in at least some cases’. (a) The Norwegian authorities shall take any legislative, administrative and other measures necessary to eliminate any State aid within the meaning of Article In the decision of 21 December 2000 it is also pointed out that 61(1) EEA resulting from the system of regionally Norway, by letter dated 27 July 2000, submitted comments to differentiated social security tax, or to render such aid the decision to initiate the formal investigation procedure and compatible with Article 61 of the EEA Agreement, that the Norwegian authorities confirmed that Norway operates a scheme that is similar to the Swedish scheme. (b) The Norwegian authorities shall eliminate any such aid Sweden was informed about the decision to initiate the formal or render it compatible with effect from 1.1.2004 investigation procedure by letter dated 4 April 2000. The unless the Authority agrees to a later date should that decision to initiate the formal investigation procedure was be considered objectively necessary and justified by the published on 1 July 2000 (4). The negative final decision was Authority in order to allow an appropriate transition published on 14 September 2001 (see footnote 3). for the undertakings in question to the adjusted situation; and In the light of the Swedish decision, the Norwegian system was thereafter discussed at several meetings between the Norwegian (c) The Norwegian authorities shall communicate to the authorities and the Authority, as well as between the Authority Authority the relevant measures adjusting the aid and the European Commission. scheme as soon as possible and in any event no later than 25 March 2003. By letter from the Authority dated 29 November 2001 (Doc. No 01-9557 D), the Norwegian authorities were i.a. informed that the Authority would start an assessment of the Norwegian 2. The Norwegian authorities are requested to inform the system aimed at formulating a proposal for appropriate Authority in writing within one month from receipt of measures so that equal conditions of competition within the this proposal that they accept, pursuant to Article 1(1) of territory covered by the EEA Agreement are re-established. Protocol 3 to the Surveillance and Court Agreement, in its entirety this proposal for appropriate measures.’ The Authority initiated a formal review of the Norwegian system by letter to the Norwegian authorities dated 4 June By letter dated 29 October 2002 from the Mission of Norway 2002 (Doc. No 02-4189 D). In this letter the Authority to the European Union, received and registered by the expressed its preliminary view that the Norwegian system of Authority on 31 October 2002 (Doc. No 02-7855 A), the regionally differentiated social security contributions might no Norwegian authorities accepted the appropriate measures. longer be compatible with the EEA Agreement. 5 In the Authority's decision of 25 September 2002 ( )to 3. Description of the proposed measures propose appropriate measures, it was concluded that the present regionally differentiated social security contributions scheme does not qualify for the derogation provided for 3.1. Notification of a transitional period in zones 3 and 4 under Article 61(3)(c) EEA. The amount of aid granted under the present scheme does not bear any relation to the additional For the purpose of the social security contributions Norway is transport costs actually incurred by a particular undertaking divided into five geographical zones. The highest tax rate is and is not calculated in line with the provisions of Annex XI 14.1 per cent in zone 1 that covers some 75 per cent of the population. In zone 5 (Nord-Troms and Finnmark) that covers the very northernmost part of the country, the rate is zero. An (3) OJ L 244, 14.9.2001, p. 32. overview of the geographical zones and tax rates is given in (4) OJ C 184, 1.7.2000, p. 10. Annex 1 to the decision of 25 September 2002 (Dec. No (5) Dec. No 172/02/COL. 172/02/COL). 11.9.2003EN Official Journal of the European Union C 216/5 By letter dated 25 March 2003 from the Ministry of Finance, The Norwegian authorities also present calculations of the the Norwegian authorities notified a transitional arrangement estimated effects of a de minimis scheme.