Commission Decision (EU) 2024/3031 of 11 June 2024 on the regional State aid SA.6... (32024D3031)
Commission Decision (EU) 2024/3031 of 11 June 2024 on the regional State aid SA.63470 (2022/C) (ex 2021/N) which Hungary is planning to implement for GKN Automotive Hungary Kft. (previously Rubin NewCo 2021 Kft.) (notified under document C(2024) 3925)
- COMMISSION DECISION (EU) 2024/3031
- of 11 June 2024
- on the regional State aid SA.63470 (2022/C) (ex 2021/N) which Hungary is planning to implement for GKN Automotive Hungary Kft. (previously Rubin NewCo 2021 Kft.)
- (notified under document C(2024) 3925)
- (Only the English version is authentic)
- (Text with EEA relevance)
- 1. PROCEDURE
- 2. DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE MEASURE
- 2.1.
- Objective of the measure
- 2.2.
- The beneficiary
- 2.3.
- The Investment Project
- 2.3.1.
- General description
- 2.3.2.
- Eligible investment costs
- 2.4.
- Form of aid, granting authority and national legal bases
- 2.4.1.
- The cash grant
- 2.4.2.
- The tax benefit
- 2.5.
- Aid amount, aid intensity and cumulation with other investment aid
- 2.6.
- Closure of other plants in the EEA and possible relocation
- 2.7.
- Maintenance of the assisted activity
- 2.8.
- Own contribution
- 2.9.
- Grounds for initiating the procedure laid down in Article 108(2) TFEU
- 2.9.1.
- Doubts on incentive effect
- 2.9.2.
- Doubts on proportionality
- 2.9.3.
- Doubts on undue negative effects on competition and trade
- 3. COMMENTS FROM HUNGARY ON THE OPENING DECISION
- 3.1.
- Incentive effect
- 3.1.1.
- Scope of GKN Automotive’s mandate
- 3.1.2.
- Payback period expected by Melrose
- 3.1.3.
- The introduction of Türkiye as the only counterfactual
- 3.1.4.
- Türkiye as a genuine counterfactual
- 3.2.
- Proportionality
- 3.2.1.
- Proportion of the NPV gap covered by the State aid
- 3.2.2.
- Size of the Investment Project
- 3.2.3.
- Time frame considered for the NPV calculation
- 3.3.
- Undue negative effects on competition and trade
- 3.4.
- Other
- 4. COMMENTS FROM OTHER INTERESTED PARTIES
- 4.1.
- Comments from Melrose
- 4.2.
- Comments from GKN Automotive
- 4.3.
- Comments from Hungary on comments from other interested parties
- 5. ASSESSMENT OF THE MEASURE
- 5.1.
- Existence of aid
- 5.2.
- Lawfulness of the measure
- 5.3.
- Legal basis for the assessment
- 5.4.
- Compatibility of the measure
- 5.4.1.
- Incentive effect
- 5.4.1.1.
- GKN Automotive’s mandate
- 5.4.1.2.
- Türkiye as the only counterfactual
- 5.4.1.3.
- Türkiye as a genuine counterfactual
- 5.4.1.4.
- Conclusion on the substantive incentive effect
- 6. CONCLUSION
- Article 1
- Article 2
- Article 3
Feedback