AG Rantos delivers opinion regarding the date of grant of an aid in Latvian Case C-653/23 -SIA TOODE
Advocate General Rantos has delivered his opinion in the preliminary ruling case C-653/23 (SIA TOODE v Valsts ieņēmumu dienests), addressing the legal status of state aid granted under an approved COVID-19 support scheme in Latvia. The case concerns a Latvian company, SIA TOODE, which was denied aid by the national tax authorities. The company challenged this decision in the national court, but the aid scheme expired before a judgment was issued.
AG Rantos stated that state aid should be considered granted at the time of the initial refusal by the tax authorities, where that refusal was declared unlawful by a national court decision delivered after the expiry of the time limit fixed for the grant of aid provided the company met the eligibility conditions before the scheme’s expiry. He also provides additional clarifications regarding the concept of the right to receive State aid which is the decisive factor in establishing the moment at which aid should be considered to have been granted within the meaning of the case-law of the Court.
If the aid in question is deemed to have been granted on the date of the tax authority’s refusal decisions, and thus at a time when the Commission’s authorisation covering that aid was in force, AG Rantos explains that the aid in question should be considered as authorised aid and, therefore existing aid, within the meaning of Article 1(b)(ii) of Regulation (EU) 2015/1589 (“The Procedural Regulation”). This is so even if it is paid after the end of the period of validity of the aid scheme approved by the Commission.
For more information, see AG Rantos opinion here.