HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN"EN
6.10.2011 Official
Journal
of
the
European
Union L
261/27
COMMISSION DECISION
of 29 June 2011
concerning aid to the rendering sector in 2003 State aid C 23/05 (ex NN 8/04 and ex N 515/03)
(notified under document C(2011) 4425)
(Only the French text is authentic)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2011/651/EU)
THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,
(5) By
letter
of
7
April
2005,
registered
on
12
April
2005,
the French authorities submitted the additional
information requested by the Commission by letter of
4 March 2005.
Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European
Union, and in particular Article 108(2) thereof,
(6) The
Commission
initiated
the
procedure
laid
down
in
Article 108(2) TFEU concerning the aid in question by
Whereas:
letter No SG(2005)D/202956 of 7 July 2005.
I. PROCEDURE
(7) The
decision
initiating
the
procedure
was
published
in
the Official Journal of the European Union ( 3 ). The
(1) By
letter
of
7
November
2003,
the
French
Permanent
Commission called on the other Member States and
Representation to the European Union notified the
interested third parties to submit their comments on
Commission under Article 108(3) of the Treaty on the
the aid in question.
Functioning of the European Union (hereinafter
‘TFEU’) ( 1 ) of an exemption from the rendering levy for
certain undertakings retailing meat.
(8) The
French
authorities
provided
their
comments
by
letters dated 20 September 2005 and 15 November
2005, registered on 17 November 2005.
(2) The
original
notification
concerned,
on
the
one
hand,
aid
granted in 2003 and, on the other, aid planned to be
granted starting in 2004. As part of the aid had already
been granted, the Commission decided at the time to
(9) The
Commission
received
comments
from
the
French
split the file into two cases. Of the aid granted in
Confederation of Butchers, Delicatessens and Caterers
2003, only the exemption from the rendering levy is
(hereinafter ‘CFBCT’) on 18 October 2005 and from a
being examined under this decision.
private company on 17 October 2005 ( 4 ) and 11 July
2008.
(3) The
rendering
levy
was
abolished
on
1
January
2004.
After that the financing of public-sector rendering
(10) By
letter of 18 April 2011, the French authorities
plants was guaranteed by the proceeds of a ‘slaughtering
confirmed that the exemption from the payment of the
tax’, to which the Commission did not raise any
tax on meat purchases (‘rendering levy’), granted for
objections (
2003 to certain companies marketing agricultural

2 ).
products, was covered by Commission Regulation (EC)
No 1998/2006 of 15 December 2006 on the application
of Articles 87 and 88 of the Treaty to de minimis aid ( 5 ).
(4)
In the context of examining the ‘slaughtering tax’ file
(State aid No N515A/03), the French authorities sent
the Commission information relevant also to this case,
II.
in particular by letter of 29 December 2003.
DESCRIPTION

(11) The measure in question concerns the financing in 2003
( 1 ) With effect from 1 December 2009, Articles 87 and 88 of the EC
of public-sector rendering plants and the destruction of
Treaty are replaced by Articles 107 and 108, respectively, of the
meat and bone meal that can no longer be used
TFEU. These two series of provisions are identical in substance. For
commercially.
the purposes of this Decision, references to Articles 107 and 108
TFEU should be considered references to Articles 87 and 88,
respectively, of the EC Treaty, where necessary.
( 3 ) OJ C 228, 17.9.2005, p. 13.
( 2 ) State aid No N 515A/03, letter to the French authorities No C(2004)
( 4 ) The company has requested that its identity be treated a confidential.
936 fin of 30.3.2004.
( 5 ) OJ L 379, 28.12.2006, p. 5.

---

L 261/28
EN
Official Journal of the European Union
6.10.2011
(12) Public-sector
rendering
plants
used
to
be
financed
by
the
(16) Starting on 1 January 2001, the proceeds of the
rendering levy, introduced by Article 302a ZD of the
rendering levy were paid directly into the general
French General Tax Code, which was adopted under
budget of the State and no longer into the fund set up
Article 1 of French Law No 96-1139 of 26 December
for that purpose. For 2003, the funds were made
1996 on the collection and destruction of animal
available at the Ministry of Agriculture, Food, Fisheries
carcases and slaughterhouse waste (hereinafter ‘Law of
and Rural Affairs by Decree No 2002-1580 of
1996’).
30 December 2002 implementing the Finance Law for
2003. They were entered under the Ministry’s ordinary
expenditure under Title IV, Public aid, Part 4, economic
measures, incentives and aid. The proceeds of this levy in
(13) The
rendering
levy
was
applied
to
the
purchases
of
meat
2003 were estimated at EUR 550 million.
and other specified products by all retailers of those
products. In principle, this levy was payable by all
persons carrying out retail sales. The tax rate was the
ex-VAT value of all purchases of meat and other
specified products by all retailers of these products:
(17) The 2003 notification provided for aid for the stocking
and destruction of animal meal as well as aid for the
transport and destruction of fallen stock and slaught
— fresh, cooked, chilled or frozen meats and offal of
erhouse waste. In addition, under the Law of 1996,
poultry, rabbit and game, of animals of the bovine,
undertakings that retailed meat and had an annual
ovine, caprine and porcine species and of horses,
turnover of less than EUR 762 245 were exempt from
asses and their crosses,
the levy. According to the information available to the
Commission, the Law of 1996 was in force throughout
2003.
— salted meats, cured meat products, lard, preserved
meats and processed offal,
(18) In
its
decision
to
initiate
the
procedure,
the
Commission
— meat- and offal-based animal feed.
concluded that the aid measures concerning the removal

and destruction of fallen stock and the stocking and
destruction of animal meal and slaughterhouse waste
did not risk adversely affecting trading conditions to an
(14) Undertakings
whose
turnover
in
the
previous
calendar
extent contrary to the common interest. They could
year was less than FRF 2 500 000 (
therefore qualify under the exception provided for in

6 ) (EUR 381 122)
excluding VAT were exempt from the payment of the
Article 107(3)(c) TFEU as measures able to contribute
levy. The rate of the levy was 0,5 % on monthly
to the development of the sector. On the other hand,
purchases of up to FRF
125
000 (EUR
19
056)
the Commission has decided to initiate the procedure
excluding VAT and 0,9 % on monthly purchases above
referred to in Article 108(2) TFEU as regards the
that amount. Article 35 of the Amending Finance Act for
existence and compatibility of aid for trade exempt
2000 (Law No 2000-1353 of 30 December 2000) made
from the payment of the rendering levy.
certain amendments to the rendering levy scheme, which
entered into force on 1 January 2001. These
amendments were to offset the effects of the BSE crisis
and the resulting extra costs. The levy was subsequently
extended to ‘other meat products’. The levy was set at
Points raised by the Commission in the context of initiating an
2,1 % on monthly purchases of up to FRF 125 000
investigation procedure
(EUR 19 056) and 3,9 % on monthly purchases above
that amount. In addition, all undertakings with a
(19) When the investigation
procedure was initiated, the
turnover in the previous calendar year of less than FRF
Commission estimated that the exemption from the
5 000 000 (EUR 762 245) excluding VAT were exempt
payment of the rendering levy implied a loss of
from the levy.
resources for the State and did not appear to be
justified by the nature and the general scheme of the
tax system, which is designed to provide the State with
revenue. Indeed, according to the information available
(15) Initially,
i.e.
from
1
January
1997,
the
proceeds
of
the
to the Commission, the exemption was based on the
levy were paid into an ad hoc fund used to finance the
overall turnover, not just the turnover on meat sales.
collection and destruction of animal carcases and
material seized at slaughterhouses and recognised as
being unfit for human or animal consumption, i.e. the
activities defined under Article 264 of the Rural Code as
falling within the remit of a public service. The fund was
(20) As the rendering levy is calculated on the value of meat
managed by the National Centre for the Development of
products, it did not seem justified to exempt from the
Farm Structures (CNASEA).
payment of the levy undertakings with a higher turnover
on meat sales when their competitors with a lower
( 6 ) On the basis of FRF 1 = EUR 0,15.
turnover on meat products would have to pay it.

---

EN
6.10.2011 Official
Journal
of
the
European
Union L
261/29
(21) Consequently,
the
exemption seemed to constitute
a
(28) However,
the
French
authorities
had
argued
prior
to
the
selective advantage. It would be aid in favour of the
entry into force of Regulation (EC) No 1998/2006 that
exempted vendors, whose tax burden would be lighter
the aid fell within the scope of Commission Regulation
as a result. On the basis of the figures for trade in meat,
(EC) No 69/2001 of 12 January 2001 on the application
the Commission concluded that the exemption of traders
of Articles 87 and 88 of the EC Treaty to de minimis
with a turnover of less than EUR 762 245 from the levy
aid ( 9 ). They pointed out that the number of undertakings
in 2003 was an advantage that might constitute State aid
concerned, an average of more than 100 000 a year, and
within the meaning of Article 107(1) TFEU.
the turnover threshold used for the exemption
(EUR 762 245) implied that the amount of the
exemption that might constitute State aid would in any
(22) The Commission could not rule out the possibility that
case be below the threshold of EUR 100 000 over a
the tax exemption might have an effect on trade between
three-year period provided for in Regulation (EC) No
Member States, in particular in border areas.
69/2001.
(23) Therefore
the
exemption
of
traders
with
a
turnover
of
less than EUR 762 245 from the levy seemed to
(29) In order to show that the amount of the exemption
constitute State aid under the terms of Article 107(1)
granted to these undertakings in 2003 was consistently
TFEU.
below EUR 100 000 over a period of 3 years, the French
authorities used two methods.
(24) The
exemption
in
this
case
seemed
to
consist
of
a
tax
reduction measure lacking any incentive element or
counterpart on the part of the beneficiaries, and its
(30) Firstly,
the
French
authorities
attempted
to
establish
the
compatibility with competition rules had not been
turnover of an undertaking that had paid a levy of
demonstrated.
EUR 100 000 over 3 years, or an average annual levy
of EUR 33 333. On the basis of the amount established,
broken down by tax bracket (2,1 % and 3,9 %), they
(25) Therefore the Commission considered that the aid fell
established the tax rate corresponding to the meat
within the scope of point 3.5 of the Community
purchases of the undertaking. Finally, using the value
Guidelines for State aid in the agriculture sector ( 7 ),
of these meat purchases, the French authorities
which were effective at that time. According to that
estimated the annual turnover on the basis of the maxi
point, any aid measure must contain some incentive
malist assumption that the undertaking in question
element or require some counterpart on the part of the
specialised in the meat trade. This method allowed
beneficiary in order to be considered compatible with the
them to establish a turnover for the undertaking that
common market. Unless exceptions are expressly
markedly exceeded the exemption threshold of the levy.
provided for in Community legislation or in the
The exemption threshold of EUR 762 245 was thus
Guidelines, unilateral State aid measures which are
exceeded by far, meaning that a company that pays
simply intended to improve the financial situation of
EUR 100 000 in taxes over 3 years may under no
producers but which in no way contribute to the devel
circumstances be exempt from the tax on meat
opment of the sector are considered to constitute
purchases.
operating aid which is incompatible with the common
market.
(31) Secondly,
the
French
authorities
tried
to
establish
the
(26) As
regards trade exempt from the payment of the
amount of tax for an undertaking that specialises in
rendering levy, the Commission could not rule out that
meat and has a turnover of EUR 762 000, which is
the aid in question might be State aid within the
just below the exemption threshold. On the basis of a
meaning of Article 107(1) TFEU and might constitute
purchases/turnover coefficient of 0,58 ( 10 ), the French
operating aid, regarding the compatibility of which
authorities calculated the value of the meat purchases
with the internal market the Commission had doubts.
of the undertaking, i.e. EUR 441 960 (762 000 × 0,58).
This second method shows that the maximum amount of
the exemption is EUR 13 132 per year and undertaking,
III. COMMENTS BY FRANCE
in other words less than EUR 100 000 over 3 years.
(27) The
French
authorities
submitted
their
comments
by
letters dated 20 September 2005 and 15 November
2005. In those letters, they stated that it could not be
(32) Following
the
entry
into
force
of
Regulation
(EC)
No
disputed that the tax exemption granted to the exempt
1998/2006, the French authorities confirmed that the
companies represented aid within the meaning of the EC
exemption from the payment of the tax on meat
Treaty. Moreover, the Commission had come to a similar
purchases (‘rendering levy’), granted for 2003 to certain
conclusion in its Decision 2005/474/EC ( 8 ) on the
companies marketing agricultural products, fell within
exemption applied between 1 January 1997 and
the scope of the said Regulation, in particular Article 5
31 December 2002 (aid NN 17/01 reclassified as C
thereof on transitional measures.
49/02).
( 9 ) OJ L 10, 13.1.2001, p. 30.
( 7 ) OJ C 28, 1.2.2000, p. 2.
( 10 ) Information from the French authorities based on industry sources
( 8 ) OJ L 176, 8.7.2005, p. 1.
(management centres of the French Confederation of Butchers).

---

L 261/30
EN
Official Journal of the European Union
6.10.2011
IV. COMMENTS FROM THIRD PARTIES
rules for the application of Article 93 of the EC
Treaty ( 13 ), because a negative decision and recovery
Comments of the Confederation of Butchers, Delicatessens and
would not take into account the legitimate expectations
Caterers (CFBCT)
of the recipient undertakings.
(33) Firstly,
the
Confederation
of
Butchers,
Delicatessens
and
Caterers (hereinafter ‘CFBCT’) pointed out that the
measure in question did not meet the criteria for the
(38) Furthermore, if the amount of the aid were evaluated a
definition of State aid and that the tax mechanism
posteriori on the basis of presumptive retroactive
applied to certain companies on the basis of the
taxation it would probably remain below the de
amount of their turnover was fully justified owing to
minimis thresholds, given that most of the potential
the general scheme of the tax system. The CFBCT
beneficiaries of the aid were microenterprises.
states that the tax on meat purchases was collected and
checked according to the rules applied to VAT and
similar taxes. The exemption threshold was based on
Comments from a private company domiciled in France
an objective and logical criterion identical to that for
thresholds applied to other taxes. The Law of 1996
(39) According to the information available to the
was part of the French system of collecting VAT. The
Commission, the private company in question engages
goal was not to grant an exceptional advantage for
in food distribution operations in France. Having paid
certain companies but rather, by introducing a
the rendering levy for the years 2001 to 2003 and
threshold level, to take into account the taxpaying
having requested that the French tax authorities refund
capacity of undertakings and, in particular, the viability
the amount paid, the company considers that it is in its
of artisanal butchers.
interest to submit its comments in the present procedure.
(34) Secondly,
according
to
the
CFBCT,
this
measure
did
not
affect intra-Community trade. Indeed, the extremely
(40) The company maintains that, contrary to the
modest size of the companies concerned by the
Commission’s conclusion in its decision of 5 July 2005
measure in question and the extremely limited
(2005/C 228/06)
( 14 ) to initiate an investigation
geographical market on which they operate cast doubt
procedure, there was no disconnection between the aid
on the claim that the measure constituted State aid
to the rendering sector and the tax on meat purchases. It
within the meaning of Article 107(1) TFEU.
considers that the rendering tax paid for 2003 is based

on Article 302a ZD of the French General Tax Code and
finances a State aid scheme pursuant to Article 107
TFEU. As this mechanism was not notified to the
(35) Even
if
it
were
considered
that
the
tax-exempt
under
Commission in advance, it should be declared illegal.
takings had received aid, the CFBCT maintains that, in
any case, this aid would comply with the rules of the
Treaty.
(41) In addition, the company maintains that the tax
exemption is incompatible with Article 107 TFEU and
that it would make the tax incompatible with the
(36) The
Commission
should
take
the
view
that
exempting
small butcheries and artisanal butchers was, in fact,
principle of equality vis-à-vis charges levied by the State
justified by an objective of general interest: the
and consequently with the rules on competition.
management of the mad cow crisis and the treatment
necessary for dangerous products. Besides, this measure
only concerned SMEs and would probably be covered by
V. ASSESSMENT
the exemption regulations valid at the time, namely
Commission Regulation (EC) No 70/2001 of
(42) Pursuant to Article 107(1) TFEU, any aid granted by a
12 January 2001 on the application of Articles 87 and
Member State or through State resources in any form
88 of the EC Treaty to State aid to small and medium-
whatsoever which distorts or threatens to distort
sized enterprises ( 11 ) and Commission Regulation (EC) No
competition by favouring certain undertakings or the
1/2004 of 23 December 2003 on the application of
production of certain goods is incompatible with the
Articles 87 and 88 of the EC Treaty to State aid to
internal market, in so far as it affects trade between
small and medium-sized enterprises active in the
Member States, save as otherwise provided for in the
production, processing and marketing of agricultural
Treaty.
products ( 12 ).
(43) Articles
107,
108
and
109
TFEU
apply
to
the
pigmeat
(37) In any case, the CFBCT maintains that the requirement
sector pursuant to Article 21 of Regulation (EEC) No
that the aid be recovered, which would be the conse
2759/75 of the Council of 29 October 1975 on the
quence of classifying the measure as incompatible State
common organisation of the market in pigmeat ( 15 ).
aid, would violate Article 14 of Council Regulation (EC)
They apply to the beef and veal sector pursuant to
No 659/1999 of 22 March 1999 laying down detailed
( 13 ) OJ L 83, 27.3.1999, p. 1.
( 11 ) OJ L 10, 13.1.2001, p. 33.
( 14 ) See footnote 3.
( 12 ) OJ L 1, 3.1.2004, p. 1.
( 15 ) OJ L 282, 1.11.1975, p. 1.

---

EN
6.10.2011 Official
Journal
of
the
European
Union L
261/31
Article 40 of Council Regulation (EC) No 1254/1999 of
(48) Pursuant
to
Article
2(2)
and
(3)
of
Regulation
(EC)
No
17 May 1999 on the common organisation of the
1998/2006, the total de minimis aid granted to any one
market in beef and veal ( 16 ). Prior to the adoption of
undertaking must not exceed EUR 200 000 over any
Regulation (EC) No 1254/1999, Articles 107, 108 and
period of three fiscal years. The ceiling laid down is
109 TFEU applied to the beef and veal sector pursuant to
expressed as a cash grant. All figures used are gross,
Article 24 of Regulation (EEC) No 805/68 of the
that is, before any deduction of tax or other charge.
Council ( 17 ). They apply to the sheepmeat and goatmeat
Where aid is awarded in a form other than a grant,
sector pursuant to Article 22 of Council Regulation (EC)
the aid amount is the gross grant equivalent of the aid.
No 2467/98 of 3 November 1998 on the common
organisation of the market in sheepmeat and
goatmeat (
(49) The undertakings in question were active in the

18 ). They apply to the poultrymeat sector
pursuant to Article 19 of Regulation (EEC) No
processing and marketing of the products as listed in
2777/75 of the Council of 29 October 1975 on the
Annex I of the Treaty and other products and were
common organisation of the market in poultrymeat (
exempt from the rendering levy in 2003. Pursuant to

19 ).
Council Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007 of 22 October
the transitional measures laid down in Article 5
2007 establishing a common organisation of agricultural
thereof, Regulation (EC) No 1998/2006 applies
markets and on specific provisions for certain agricultural
consequently to this case.
products ( ′single CMO Regulation ′) ( 20 ) repealed these
Regulations, and Article 180 thereof states that the
(50) The French authorities have established that the
rules on State aid apply to the above-mentioned
conditions required by Regulation (EC) No 1998/2006
products.
were fulfilled by showing that the grant equivalent of the
aid received by each beneficiary did not under any
circumstances exceed EUR 200 000 over any period of
3 years, as the maximum amount of the exemption was
(44) The
French
authorities
confirmed
that
the
exemption
EUR 13 132 per year and undertaking (see recital 29).
from the payment of the tax on meat purchases
(‘rendering levy’), granted for 2003 to certain
companies marketing agricultural products, fell within
(51) In view of the foregoing, the Commission considers that
the scope of Regulation (EC) No 1998/2006.
the tax-exemption of undertakings retailing meat whose
annual turnover was less than EUR 762 245 in 2003
falls within the scope of Regulation (EC) No
(45) According
to
Regulation
(EC)
No
1998/2006,
aid
that
1998/2006 and fulfils the conditions laid down
fulfils the conditions laid down therein is deemed not
therein. Therefore this exemption does not constitute
to meet all the criteria of Article 107(1) of TFEU and
State aid within the meaning of Article 107(1) TFEU,
is therefore exempt from the notification requirement of
Article 108(3) TFEU.
HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
(46) Regulation
(EC)
No
1998/2006
applies
to
aid
granted
to
undertakings in all sectors but, in the case of under
Article 1
takings active in the processing and marketing of agri
cultural products as listed in Annex I to the Treaty, only
The exemption of undertakings retailing meat whose turnover is
when the amount of aid is not fixed on the basis of the
less than EUR 762 245 from the rendering levy in 2003 does
price or quantity of such products purchased from
not constitute aid pursuant to Article 107(1) TFEU.
primary producers or put on the market by the under
takings concerned and when the aid is not conditional
Article 2
on being partly or entirely passed on to primary
producers.
This Decision is addressed to the French Republic.
(47) Pursuant
to
Article
5(1)
thereof,
Regulation
(EC)
No
1998/2006 applies to aid granted before its entry into
Done at Brussels, 29 June 2011.
force to undertakings active in the processing and
marketing of agricultural products if the aid fulfils all
For the Commission
the conditions laid down in Articles 1 and 2. Regulation
(EC) No 1998/2006 entered into force on 29 December
Dacian CIOLO
2006.
Member of the Commission
( 16 ) OJ L 160, 26.6.1999, p. 21.
( 17 ) OJ L 148, 28.6.1968, p. 24.
( 18 ) OJ L 312, 20.11.1998, p. 1.
( 19 ) OJ L 282, 1.11.1975, p. 77.
( 20 ) OJ L 299, 16.11.2007, p. 1.

---