Interesting but slightly over-wrought piece by David Collins on State aid under the Withdrawal Agreement. politeia.co.uk/state-aid-the-…
It focuses entirely on the backstop arrangements - so needs to be read with the caveat that those arrangements are not supposed to be used.
It’s over-wrought in that it exaggerates the extent to which the the State aid rules constrain fiscal policy. The truth is that the State aid rules always have constrained “tax breaks” (as do WTO anti-subsidy rules).
So there is nothing “aggressive” or “manipulative” about applying State aid rules to tax breaks.
There is a technical argument about eg whether eg Apple benefited from a “tax break” in Ireland, in a way that amounted to State aid. But Collins’ piece goes way overboard in describing the Commission’s approach to State aid as a way of “controlling” fiscal policy.
Nonetheless there are some important points here. The Commission will, under the backstop, remain directly in charge of all U.K. State aid that affects EU/Northern Ireland trade (potentially a lot of U.K. measures).
It will also be closely supervising CMA application of State aid rules applying to GB/EU trade.
Moreover, the CMA’s powers will include powers to strike down all State aid measures - including, potentially, Acts of Parliament (if they contain a tax break amounting to State aid). Which is quite a power.
For more detail, I wrote a piece here. uksala.org/state-aid-and-…
