2018 | 11(17) | 113-129
Article title

Selectivity in Fiscal Aids: Recent Developments

Title variants
Languages of publication
The notion of fiscal aid is becoming crucial in determining the relationship between supra-national integration and national tax sovereignty; the selectivity criterion is often key in the assessment of compatibility of fiscal measures with Article 107(1) TFEU. Therefore, the notion of selectivity as defined by the recent case-law of the CJEU and decision-making practice of the Commission is fundamental in order to understand the actual allocation of powers in direct taxation matters. Against this backdrop, the aim of the present article is to establish what the current notion of selectivity is in fiscal aids, assessing whether the approach used by the CJEU and the Commission share common patterns, and evaluating the impact of such interpretation on the division of competences within the EU. In particular, this article offers a critical reading of the recent European Commission v. World Duty Free case and of the so-called Tax Rulings Decisions.
La notion d’aide fiscal est en train de devenir cruciale dans la détermination des relations entre l’intégration supranationale et la souveraineté fiscale nationale. Le critère de la sélectivité joue souvent un rôle fondamental dans la détermination de la compatibilité des mesures fiscales avec l’article 107 (1) TFUE. Par conséquent, la notion de sélectivité, comme déterminée par la récent jurisprudence de la CJUE et la pratique décisionnel de la Commission, est fondamentale pour comprendre la répartition des pouvoirs en matière de taxation directe. Dans ce contexte, le but du présent article est d’établir quelle est la notion actuelle de sélectivité dans les aides fiscale, en évaluant si les approches utilisées par la CJUE et la Commission partagent un modèle commun et l’impact de cette interprétation sur la répartition des compétences au sein de l’UE. En particulier, cet article offre une lecture critique du récent arrêt Commission européenne c. World Duty Free et des soidisant «Tax Rulings».
Physical description
  • Università degli Studi di Torino
  • Aalbers, M. (2017). Gibraltar: A Rock Solid Interpretation of the Selectivity Criterion. European State Aid Law Quarterly, 16(3), 495–499,
  • Arena, A. (2017a). State Aids and Tax rulings: An assessment of the Commission’s recent decisional practice. Market and Competition Law Review, 1(1), 49–79.
  • Arena, A. (2017b). The Commission’s ATR decisions before the CJEU: Untangling the legal conundrums of a recent trend in fiscal aids. In: R. Mastroianni and A. Arena(eds),60 Years of EU Competitions Law: Stocktaking and Future Prospects(pp. 227–251). Napoli: Editoriale Scientifica.
  • Arena, A. (2017c). Le decisioni sui tax rulings al vaglio della CGUE: un nuovo capitolo sul controllo degli aiuti di Stato, un passo in avanti verso l’unione fiscale? Diritto del Commercio Internazionale, 31(4), 925–965.
  • Azoulai, L. (2011). The ‘Retained Powers’ Formula in the Case Law of the European Court of Justice: EU Law as Total Law? European Journal of Legal Studies, 4(2), 192–219,
  • Bartosch, A. (2009). On Being Selective in Selectivity. European State Aid Law Quarterly, 8(4), 43–434,
  • Boccaccio, M. (2016). La disciplina degli aiuti fiscali tra la funzione di controllo e quella di armonizzazione impropria: il ruolo della selettività. Public Finance Research Papers, Istituto di Economia e Finanza, DIGEF, Sapienza University of Rome, 20, 1–33.
  • Bousin, J. and Piernas, J. (2008). Developments in the Notion of Selectivity. European State Aid Law Quarterly, 7(4), 634–653,
  • Cachia, F. (2017). Aggressive Tax Planning; An Analysis from an EU Perspective. EC Tax Review, 26(5), 257–273.
  • Da Cruz Vilaca, J.L. (2009). Material and Geographic Selectivity in State Aid –Recent Developments. European State Aid Law Quarterly, 8(4), 443–452,
  • Derenne, J. (2017). Commission v. World Duty Free Group a.o.: Selectivity in Fiscal) State Aid, quo vadis Curia? Journal of European Competition Law & Practice, 8(5), 311–313,
  • Douma, S. and Kardachaki, A. (2016). The Impact of European Union Law on the Possibilities of European Union Member States to Adapt International Tax Rules to the Business Models of Multinational Enterprises. Intertax, 44(10), 746–754.
  • Giraud, A. and Petit, S. (2017). Tax Rulings and State Aid Qualification: Should Reality Matter? European State Aid Law Quarterly, 16(2), 233–242,
  • Giraud, A. and Petit, S. (2015). Spanish Fiscal Aid Cases: the Good, the Bad and the Unclear. European State Aid Law Quarterly, 14(2), 295–300.
  • Iliopoulos, T. (2017). The State Aid Cases of Starbucks and Fiat: New Routes for the Concept of Selectivity. European State Aid Law Quarterly, 16(2), 263–271,
  • Jaeger, T. (2015). From Santander to LuxLeaks – and Back. European State Aid Law Quarterly, 14(3), 345–357.
  • Jaeger, T. (2017). Tax Concessions for Multinational: In or Out of the Reach of State Aid Law? Journal of European Competition Law & Practice, 8(4), 221–232,
  • Joris, T. and De Cock, W. (2017). Is Belgium and Forum 187 v. Commissiona Suitable Legal Source for an EU ‘At Arm’s Length Principle’? European State Aid Law Quarterly, 16(4), 607–616,
  • Kyriazis, D. (2016). From Soft Law to Soft Law through Hard Law: The Commission’s Approach to the State Aid Assessment of Tax Rulings. European State Aid Law Quarterly, 15(3), 428–439,
  • Lindsay-Poulsen, W. (2008). Regional Autonomy, Geographic Selectivity and Fiscal Aid: Between ‘The Rock’ and a Hard Place. European Competition Law Review, 29(1), p.43–49.
  • Lovdhal Gormsen, L. (2016). EU State Aid Law and Transfer Pricing: A Critical Introduction to a New Saga. Journal of European Competition Law & Practice, 7(6), 369–382,
  • Moreno González, S. (2017). Taxation and Limits to State Aid: the Case Law of the CJEU on Regional Selectivity and Its Application by Spanish Courts. European State Aid Law Quarterly, 16(3), 340–353,
  • Nicolaides, P. (2015). New Limits to the Concept of Selectivity: the Birth of a ‘General Exception’ to the Prohibition of State Aid in EU Competition Law. Journal of European Competition Law & Practice, 6(5), 315–323,
  • Nicolaides, P. (2007). Developments in Fiscal Aid: New Interpretations and New Problems with the Concept of Selectivity. European State Aid Law Quarterly, 6(1), 43–49,
  • Pérez-Bernabeu, B. (2017). Refining the Derogation Test on Material Tax Selectivity: The Equality Test. European State Aid Law Quarterly, 16(4), 582–597,
  • Staviczky, P. (2015). De Facto Selectivity in the Light of the Recent Case Law of the General Court. European State Aid Law Quarterly, 14(1), 117–129.
  • Stuart, E. (2017). Whether or Not to Bite the Apple: Some Implications of the August 2016 Commission Decision on Irish Tax Benefits for Apple.European State Aid Law Quarterly, 16(2), 209–232,
  • Temple Lang, J. (2015). Autogrill España and Banco Santander: the Concept of ‘General’ Tax Measures Clarified for State Aid. European Law Review, 40, 763–768.
  • Traversa, E. and Flamini, A. (2015). Fighting Harmful Tax Competition through EU State Aid Law: Will the Hardening of Soft Law Suffice? European State Aid Law Quarterly, 14(3), 323–331.
  • Verschuur, S. and Stroungi, M. (2017). State Aid and Tax Rulings – the ommission’s Approach to Virtual Payments: Equal Treatment of Multinationals? European State Aid Law Quarterly, 16(4), 598–606,
Document Type
Publication order reference
YADDA identifier
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.