EU COMPETITION LAW AND POLICY IN THE TOURISM SECTOR 73 7.2. Overview of the Commission’s decisional practice in the tourism sector As recent cases suggest, tourism undertakings are frequent recipients of public assistance, much of which is not problematic from the Article 107 TFEU point of view. For example, the subsidies to a local swimming pool in Dorsten or improvement of leisure areas for rural tourism and winter sports in France275 were not likely to affect intra-community trade276, and the same is true for Brighton Pier277, where the Commission considered that restoration of the pier did not affect competition or intra-community trade. Even if it did, it would be compatible under Article 107(3)(d). Normally, the culture and heritage conservation (possibly pertinent to tourism) is also less problematic from the state aid standpoint278, given that the Commission has generally held that the restoration of cultural and historical landmarks does not affect intra-Union trade. Consequently, only the funding of large and renowned cultural institutions and events that are widely promoted outside their home region fall under the state aid rules279. A typical example of an exemption under the state aid rules on cultural grounds is the 2011 Basque Museums case280, in which the Commission assessed the compatibility of the aid and found that it pursued a genuine cultural objective, as the museum is destined for the general public. In addition, trading conditions and competition were not considered to be significantly affected contrary to the common interest. As museums often do not have sufficient resources and the aid they receive is somewhat limited, public assistance necessary for their maintenance is usually justified. The Lipica Horses case281 was assessed under the same exception, having the Commission concluded that the preservation of the breed and living environment promotes a genuine cultural objective and is necessary for the protection of the national heritage282. In Andaluza Holding case283, the Commission held that the 275 European Commission Press Release regarding French state aid schemes (1990), available at: https://europa. eu/rapid/press-release_IP-89-985_en.htm. 276 Case N258/2000 – Germany, Leisure pool Dorsten (2001). 277 Case N560/2001 – UK, National heritage fund for Brighton West Pier Trust (2002). 278 See, e.g.: SA.51767 – Culture and heritage conservation in the Bochnia salt mine; SA.36361 – Program CZ 06 Cultural heritage and Contemporary Art; N661/2009 – Indemnity scheme for federal museums 2010-2015; N39/2010 – Soutient le tourisme culturel, etc. 279 See, e.g. Case NN 55/2005 – Poland – Heritage conservation. (2005). 280 Case N1/2010 – Spain, State aid to Basque museums (2010). 281 Case N471/2008 – Slovenia, Lipica Horses (2008). 282 See also, other cases involving state aid for preserving the national heritage: Case N50/2007- Austria, Indemnity scheme for federal museums (2010); Case N27/2009 – Hungary, Aid for mobility of museum collections (2009). 283 Case N458/2004 – Spain, State aid to Editorial Andaluza Holding, SL (2004).
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTE4NzM5Nw==