EU Probes State Aid Given To Poland’s LG Chem’s Electric Vehicles Battery Plant
The European Commission has opened an in-depth investigation to assess whether €95 million (US$111.6 million) of public support granted by Poland to chemical company LG Chem Group for investing in the expansion of its battery cell production facility for electric vehicles (EV) in Biskupice Podgórne in the Dolnoślaskie region, Poland, is in line with EU rules on regional State aid.
Commissioner Margrethe Vestager, in charge of competition policy, said, “EU State aid rules enable Member States to foster economic growth in disadvantaged regions in Europe. At the same time, we need to ensure that the aid is really needed to attract private investments to the region concerned, and avoid that the recipient of the aid gains an unfair advantage over its competitors at the expense of taxpayers. We will carefully investigate whether Poland’s support was necessary to trigger LG Chem’s decision to expand its existing cell production facility in Poland, is kept to the minimum necessary and does not distort competition or harm cohesion in the EU.”
In 2017, LG Chem decided to invest more than €1 billion (US$1.17 billion) in the expansion of its production capacity of lithium-ion cells and battery modules and packs for electric vehicles in its existing plant in the Dolnoślaskie region of Poland. In 2019, Poland notified the Commission of its plans to grant €95 million of public support for the expansion.
EU State aid rules, in particular the Commission’s 2014 Regional State Aid Guidelines, enable Member States to support economic development and employment in the EU’s disadvantaged regions and to foster regional cohesion in the Single Market.
The measures need to fulfil certain conditions to make sure that they have the intended positive effect. This includes that the support must incentivise private investment, be kept to the minimum necessary, must not lure away investment from a region in another Member State which is at least as disadvantaged (“anti-cohesion effect”) and must not be directly causing the relocation of activities (such as jobs) to the Member State granting the support from elsewhere in the EU.
Full Content: Europa
Want more news? Subscribe to CPI’s free daily newsletter for more headlines and updates on antitrust developments around the world.
Featured News
Croatian Supermarket Chain Tommy Cleared to Acquire Brodokomerc Nova
Oct 13, 2024 by
CPI
X and Unilever Settle Antitrust Dispute, Continuing Partnership
Oct 13, 2024 by
CPI
Federal Judge Allows Antitrust Claims Against GoDaddy to Proceed
Oct 13, 2024 by
CPI
Court Ruling Opens Door for Microsoft to Sell Xbox Games on Android Without Google’s Cut
Oct 13, 2024 by
CPI
Realtors Appeal to Supreme Court Over DOJ’s Investigation into Antitrust Violations
Oct 13, 2024 by
CPI
Antitrust Mix by CPI
Antitrust Chronicle® – Refusal to Deal
Sep 27, 2024 by
CPI
Antitrust’s Refusal-to-Deal Doctrine: The Emperor Has No Clothes
Sep 27, 2024 by
Erik Hovenkamp
Why All Antitrust Claims are Refusal to Deal Claims and What that Means for Policy
Sep 27, 2024 by
Ramsi Woodcock
The Aspen Misadventure
Sep 27, 2024 by
Roger Blair & Holly P. Stidham
Refusal to Deal in Antitrust Law: Evolving Jurisprudence and Business Justifications in the Align Technology Case
Sep 27, 2024 by
Timothy Hsieh