Lufthansa and Italy at odds with the European Commission
Lufthansa, Germany’s largest airline, and Italy find themselves embroiled in a dispute with the European Commission over the terms of a government bailout. As COVID-19 continues to wreak havoc on the aviation industry, governments have come to the aid of struggling airlines to prevent bankruptcies and job losses. However, not all bailouts have been deemed permissible under EU state aid rules, leading to disagreements and tensions between airlines and the European Commission.
In June 2020, Lufthansa received a €9 billion bailout from the German government, which included substantial support from the state-owned development bank KfW. The European Commission, responsible for ensuring fair competition and preventing the distortion of markets in the European Union, soon raised objections to the terms of the bailout. In return for the financial support, the European Commission demanded that Lufthansa give up some of its landing slots at its hub airports in Frankfurt and Munich. These slots would then be made available to competitors, allowing for increased competition in the German aviation market.
Lufthansa reluctantly agreed to the European Commission’s demands, even though it saw the forced relinquishment of landing slots as unfair and detrimental to its business. However, this agreement between Lufthansa and the European Commission did not sit well with the Italian government. In early October, Italy lodged a complaint with the European Court of Justice, arguing that the conditions imposed on Lufthansa were discriminatory and favored other airlines at the expense of Italy’s own national carrier, Alitalia.
Read:Ryanair sieht weiteres Potenzial für 2024Italy, too, has its own airline struggling to stay afloat. Alitalia has been teetering on the edge of bankruptcy for years, and the COVID-19 pandemic has pushed it further into financial turmoil. The Italian government has been negotiating a bailout for Alitalia with the European Commission, but has repeatedly faced objections and delays due to concerns over competition rules. Italy sees Lufthansa’s case as setting a precedent for future bailouts, where airlines are subjected to stringent conditions that may work against their national carriers.
This clash between Lufthansa, Italy, and the European Commission highlights the challenges of balancing state aid with fair competition. The European Union is committed to ensuring a level playing field among its member states, but the COVID-19 crisis has required unprecedented actions to prevent economic collapse. Governments argue that they need flexibility in providing financial support to their struggling airlines, while the European Commission insists on upholding competition rules to prevent unfair advantages.
As the legal battle between Lufthansa and Italy unfolds before the European Court of Justice, the outcome of this case will have far-reaching implications for the aviation industry and the future of government bailouts. It will determine whether governments can provide financial support to their airlines without facing stringent conditions imposed by the European Commission. Furthermore, it will shape the relationship and balance of power between member states and the supranational authority of the European Union.
Read:AMD mit Entlassungen in der Radeon Technologies GroupIn the midst of a global pandemic that has decimated the aviation industry, finding a compromise that allows for financial stability while preserving fair competition is essential. Both airlines and governments must work together to address the challenges posed by the COVID-19 crisis, while respecting the rules and regulations set by the European Union. Only through cooperation and understanding can a sustainable solution be found that supports the recovery and future growth of the aviation sector.
.
Beitrag vom 19.10.2023 – 14:13 Uhr
Französische Einflussnahme zum Schutze der Air France, na gut. Als de herfst begint, is het een slechte spanning, wie in Frankrijk de SAS overleeft door AF/KL echt vruchtbaar te maken. En wie zou er nog meer reageren…
Beitrag vom 19.10.2023 – 13:29 Uhr
Wie komt de feedback bekijken omdat deze illegaal is geplant? Een (bedrijfs)ondernemer kan volgens IMHO niet illegaal zijn.
Read:Horror-Flug für Ryanair-Passagiere: Flieger dreht nach Belfast um – schwere Vorwürfe gegen CrewAls je het zo bekijkt, is het belangrijk op te merken dat het ook belangrijk is om een lagere risicofactor (41%) te hebben, maar bij deze optie is dit niet het geval. Als uw man en vrouw daar wonen, kunt u in de toekomst in Brussel naar het buitenland reizen, waar u minder snel een man bent en de Folgeschritte kunt schrijven en erover kunt lezen. Dat is zwart, het was lastig, maar in de mijne is Augen keines illegaal.
Beitrag vom 19.10.2023 – 13:27 Uhr
Ja, met het voordeel dat de volledigheid niet zonder onnodige lasten is, en dat de toekomst een ITA-weddenschap van 41% is met rumschleppen en het financiële risico dat met vertragingen gepaard gaat.
De moed om dat te doen was zo groot dat het hier een belangrijke strategie was.
Interessant inderdaad, en waarin Frankreichs Regierung tatsächlich de Finger im Spiel hat, um Air France – KLM zu schützen. Zuzutrauen zijn ihr. En was dat legaal?
En de Italiaanse regelgeving heeft – over het geheel genomen – de vinger in de pap “en de man zu brengen”. De Commissie heeft de identiteit van de Basis von Konsultationen mit dem Rat, dh. de enkele Regierungen. Ich sehe da nicht wirklich was illegaal.
En als je een ‘superhart’ in gedachten hebt, zou je dat durven doen als je bang was dat je anders door je eigen doelstellingen zou worden beïnvloed.
De echte informatie over de eerdere ervaringen vormt de basis voor ons Theater Donner.