INHALT

Commission Decision (EU) 2023/2388 of 10 August 2022 on the state aid SA.57991 – 2021/C (ex 2021/NN) implemented by Denmark for USO compensation to Post Danmark A/S for 2020 (notified under document C(2022) 5706)

COMMISSION DECISION (EU) 2023/2388
of 10 August 2022
on the state aid SA.57991 – 2021/C (ex 2021/NN) implemented by Denmark for USO compensation to Post Danmark A/S for 2020
(notified under document C(2022) 5706)
(Only the English version is authentic)
(Text with EEA relevance)
1.
PROCEDURE
2.
DESCRIPTION OF THE AID
2.1.
Beneficiary
2.2.
The Universal Service Obligation
2.3.
Previous USO compensation decisions for Post Danmark
2.4.
Budget
2.5.
Legal basis
2.6.
Duration
2.7.
Grounds for initiating the procedure
3.
COMMENTS FROM INTERESTED PARTIES
3.1.
Compliance with Directive 2006/111/EC
3.2.
Compliance with NAC methodology
3.2.1.
Input data for NAC
3.2.2.
Access to full NAC figures
3.2.3.
Assumptions made in counterfactual scenario of the NAC methodology
3.2.3.1.
International letter and parcel distribution
3.2.3.2.
Free distribution service for the blind
3.2.3.3.
Countrywide business-letter distribution
3.2.3.4.
USO distribution service through postal outlets
3.2.4.
Impact of downsizing on market share
3.2.5.
Intangible benefits
3.2.5.1.
Ubiquity
3.2.5.2.
Corporate reputation and brand value
3.2.5.3.
Mailboxes
3.2.5.4.
Stamps
3.2.5.5.
Economies of scale
3.2.5.6.
Bargaining power
3.2.5.7.
Advertising effects
3.2.5.8.
Demand complementarities
3.2.5.9.
Parking/stopping exemptions
3.2.5.10.
Access to public registers and customer/demand trends
3.2.6.
USO is an advantage
3.2.7.
Stamps revenue
3.2.8.
Alleged double counting
3.2.9.
Benchmarking exercise
3.2.10.
Sorted-magazine mail
3.3.
Compliance with Directive 97/67/EC – Exclusive rights
4.
COMMENTS FROM DENMARK ON THE OPENING DECISION
4.1.
Lawfulness of the aid
4.2.
Compliance with Directive 2006/111/EC
4.2.1.
Description of how Post Danmark allocates costs
4.2.2.
Description of how Post Danmark allocates revenues
4.2.3.
Description of how Post Danmark keeps separate accounts
4.2.4.
Description of how Post Danmark’s accounting practices are supervised
4.2.4.1.
Supervision
4.2.4.2.
Assessment by Rigsrevisionen of adequacy of supervision
4.2.4.3.
Follow-up from the Minister of Transport to the findings of Statsrevisorerne and Rigsrevisionen
4.2.4.4.
Rigsrevisionen’s conclusions following the reaction of the Minister of Transport
4.2.5.
Denmark’s conclusion on the cost accounting
4.3.
Compliance with NAC methodology
4.3.1.
Input data for NAC
4.3.2.
Assumptions made in counterfactual scenario of the NAC methodology
4.3.2.1.
Downsizing the company (lower volumes)
4.3.2.2.
Closure of sorting centre and distribution hubs and impact on transport costs
4.3.2.3.
Conclusion
4.3.3.
Denmark’s conclusion on the NAC methodology
5.
COMMENTS FROM DENMARK ON COMMENTS OF INTERESTED PARTIES
5.1.
Compliance with Directive 2006/111/EC
5.2.
Compliance with NAC Methodology
5.2.1.
Assumptions made in the counterfactual
5.2.2.
Impact of downsizing on market share
5.2.3.
Intangible benefits
5.2.3.1.
Ubiquity
5.2.3.2.
Corporate reputation and brand value
5.2.3.3.
Mailboxes
5.2.3.4.
Stamps
5.2.3.5.
Economies of scale
5.2.3.6.
Bargaining power
5.2.3.7.
Advertising effects
5.2.3.8.
Demand complementarities
5.2.3.9.
Parking and stopping exemptions
5.2.3.10.
Access to public registers and customer/demand trends
5.2.4.
USO is an advantage
5.2.5.
Stamps revenue
5.2.6.
Alleged double counting
5.2.7.
Benchmarking exercise
5.2.8.
Sorted-magazine mail
5.3.
Compliance with Directive 97/67/EC – exclusive rights
6.
ASSESSMENT OF THE AID
6.1.
Lawfulness
6.2.
Existence of aid
6.2.1.
Measure imputable to the State and through State resources
6.2.2.
Measure granted to an undertaking
6.2.3.
Advantage
6.2.4.
Selectivity
6.2.5.
Effect on trade and distortion of competition
6.2.6.
Conclusion on the existence of aid
6.3.
Compatibility
6.3.1.
Compatibility assessment under the 2012 SGEI Framework
6.3.1.1.
Genuine service of general economic interest as referred to in Article 106 TFEU
6.3.1.2.
Need for an entrustment act specifying the public service obligations and the methods for calculating compensation
6.3.1.3.
Duration of the entrustment
6.3.1.4.
Compliance with Directive 2006/111/EC
6.3.1.4.1. Assessment of compliance with Directive 2006/111/EC and doubts expressed in opening decision
6.3.1.4.2. Assessment of specific comments from interested parties on the compliance with Directive 2006/111/EC
6.3.1.5.
Compliance with EU public procurement rules
6.3.1.6.
Absence of discrimination
6.3.1.7.
Calculation of the net cost of the Universal Postal Service over 2020
6.3.1.7.1. Net Avoided Cost methodology
A -
VAT exemption
B -
Intellectual property assets
C -
Philately and unused stamps
D -
Economies of scale
E -
Bargaining power
F -
Universal coverage
6.3.1.7.2. Results of the NAC calculation
6.3.1.7.3. Verification by Denmark of the reliability of the net avoided cost calculation
6.3.1.7.3.1. Commission’s assessment of the NAC in light of the doubts expressed in the opening decision.
6.3.1.7.4. Commission’s assessment of claims from interested parties on the Net Avoided Cost methodology
Figure 10
(146)
Post Danmark’s (which operates under the name ‘PostNord’
(147)
) image in Denmark. Until 2019, the ranking contained 140 companies, since 2019, the ranking contains 100 companies.
6.3.1.8.
Efficiency incentives
6.3.1.9.
Transparency
6.3.1.10.
Additional requirements which may be necessary to ensure that the development of trade is not affected to an extent contrary to the interests of the Union
6.3.2.
Conclusion on compatibility
6.4.
Conclusion
Article 1
Article 2