Commission Implementing Decision (EU) 2025/322 of 18 February 2025 amending Implementing Decision (EU) 2016/2323 establishing the European List of ship recycling facilities pursuant to Regulation (EU) No 1257/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council on ship recycling

Official Journalof the European Union ENL series
2025/322 19.2.2025
(1) Article 6(2), point (a), of Regulation (EU) No 1257/2013 requires ship owners to ensure that ships destined to be recycled are only recycled at ship recycling facilities included in the European List of ship recycling facilities (‘European List’) published pursuant to Article 16(2) of that Regulation.
(2) The European List is set out in Commission Implementing Decision (EU) 2016/2323(2).
(3) The authorisation of NV Galloo Recycling Ghent, a ship recycling facility located in Belgium is due to expire on 31 March 2025. The Commission has received information from the competent authorities in Belgium that the authorisation to conduct ship recycling granted to that facility has been renewed for a period of five years prior to its expiry, in accordance with Article 14 of Regulation (EU) No 1257/2013. Furthermore, the competent authorities in Belgium informed the Commission that the facility NV Galloo Recycling Ghent has changed name to NV Galloo and has notified new maximum ship dimensions that the facility can accept. The European List should therefore be updated to reflect those changes.
(4) The authorisation of Jatob Frederikshavn ApS, a ship recycling facility located in Denmark is due to expire on 9 March 2025. The competent authorities in Denmark informed the Commission that the authorisation to conduct ship recycling granted to that facility has been renewed for a period of five years prior to its expiry, in accordance with Article 14 of Regulation (EU) No 1257/2013. They also informed about a change to the maximum annual ship recycling output. The European List should therefore be updated to reflect those changes.
(5) The authorisation of Les Recycleurs Bretons-Navaléo, a ship recycling facility located in France is due to expire on 19 June 2025. The Commission has received information from the competent authorities in France that the authorisation to conduct ship recycling granted to that facility has been renewed for a period of five years prior to its expiry, in accordance with Article 14 of Regulation (EU) No 1257/2013. Furthermore, the competent authorities in France informed the Commission about changes in the contact details of the ship recycling facility Les Recycleurs Bretons-Navaléo and new maximum ship dimensions that the facility can accept. The European List should therefore be updated to reflect those changes.
(6) The competent authorities in the Netherlands have informed the Commission that the ship recycling facility Sagro Aannemingsmaatschappij Zeeland B.V. located in the Netherlands has been authorised in accordance with Article 14 of Regulation (EU) No 1257/2013. The Netherlands has provided the Commission with all information relevant for that facility to be included in the European List. That ship recycling facility should therefore be included in the European List.
(7) The inclusion in the European List of Galaksis N., a ship recycling facility located in Latvia, expired on 17 July 2024. The competent authorities in Latvia have informed the Commission about the change of the operator of the ship recycling facility and requested to reflect the change of the name of the facility accordingly, the other conditions of the permit remaining unchanged. However, since the authorisation to conduct ship recycling was granted for an unlimited period, it was not issued in accordance with Article 14 of Regulation (EU) No 1257/2013. Therefore, the requested changes should not be included and Galaksis N. should be removed from the European List.
(8) The authorisation of UAB Vakarų refonda, a ship recycling facility located in Lithuania is due to expire on 30 April 2025 and the competent authority in Lithuania informed the Commission that the permit was withdrawn upon request of the facility. That ship recycling facility should therefore be removed from the European List.
(9) The inclusion in the European List of BLRT Refonda Baltic OÜ, a ship recycling facility located in Estonia is due to expire on 15 February 2026. The competent authorities in Estonia have informed the Commission about the change of the operator of the ship recycling facility to Metruna OÜ and requested to reflect the change of the name of the facility accordingly, the other conditions of the permit remaining unchanged. The European List should therefore be updated to reflect that change.
(10) The Commission has received an application to be included in the European List, in accordance with Article 15(1) of Regulation (EU) No 1257/2013 for Temurtaşlar Gemi Söküm İthalat İhracat San. Ve Tic. A.Ş., a ship recycling facility located in Türkiye. Having assessed the information and supporting evidence provided and gathered in accordance with Article 15 of that Regulation, the Commission considers that the facility complies with the requirements set out in Article 13 of that Regulation to conduct ship recycling and to be included in the European List. Temurtaşlar Gemi Söküm İthalat İhracat San. Ve Tic. A.Ş. should therefore be included in the European List.
(11) The inclusion in the European List of Sök Denizcilik Tic. Ltd. Şti. and Öge Gemi Söküm İth. İhr.Tİc. San. A.Ş., ship recycling facilities located in Türkiye, are due to expire on 12 February 2025. The Commission has received information from those facilities that they wish to renew their inclusion in the European List in accordance with Article 15 of Regulation (EU) No 1257/2013. Having assessed the information and supporting evidence provided and gathered in accordance with Article 15 of Regulation (EU) No 1257/2013, including through inspections, the Commission considers that the facilities comply with the requirements set out in Article 13 of that Regulation to conduct ship recycling and to be included in the European List. The inclusion of those ship recycling facilities in the European List should therefore be renewed.
(12) The inclusion in the European List of Ege Celik San. Ve Tic A.Ş., a ship recycling facility located in Turkiye is due to expire on 12 February 2025. The Commission has received information from that facility that it wishes to renew its inclusion in the European List in accordance with Article 15 of Regulation (EU) No 1257/2013. Having assessed the information and supporting evidence provided and gathered in accordance with Article 15 of Regulation (EU) No 1257/2013, including through inspections, the Commission considers that the facility has failed to comply with certain requirements of Article 13(1), points (e), (f), (g) and (i) of that Article. The facility has failed to take adequate measures to maintain the hull integrity in order to control any leakage in the intertidal zone. The facility cut the primary hull while below the drainage line without the use of a slag collector and handled waste on the shoreline without an impermeable floor. The facility also failed to follow their own procedures aimed at ensuring that possible flammable materials are removed prior to cutting, which has posed a high risk to the safety of workers. Ege Celik San. Ve Tic A.Ş. should therefore be removed from the European List.
(13) Implementing Decision (EU) 2016/2323 should therefore be amended accordingly.
(14) The measures provided for in this Decision are in accordance with the opinion of the Committee established by Article 25 of Regulation (EU) No 1257/2013,
Name of the facility Method of recycling Type and size of ships that can be recycled Limitations and conditions under which the ship recycling facility operates, including as regards hazardous waste management Details on the explicit or tacit procedure for the approval of the ship recycling plan by the competent authority(1) Maximum annual ship recycling output, calculated as the sum of the weight of ships expressed in LDT that have been recycled in a given year in that facility(2) Date of expiry of inclusion in the European List(3)
BELGIUM
NV GallooScheepszatestraat 99000 GentBelgiumPhone: +32(0)9/251 25 21Email:[email protected] NV Galloo Scheepszatestraat 9 9000 Gent Belgium Alongside (wet berth), slope Ships as defined in point (1) of Article 3(1) of Regulation (EU) No 1257/2013Maximum ship dimensions:Length: 366 metersWidth: 49 metersDraught: 14,5 meters Length: 366 meters Width: 49 meters Draught: 14,5 meters Tacit approval, with a maximum review period of 30 days 34 000(4) 31 March 2030
NV Galloo
Scheepszatestraat 9
9000 Gent
Belgium
Length: 366 meters
Width: 49 meters
Draught: 14,5 meters
DENMARK
FAYARD A/SKystvejen 100DK-5330 MunkeboDenmarkwww.fayard.dkPhone: +45 7592 0000Email:[email protected] FAYARD A/S Kystvejen 100 DK-5330 Munkebo Denmark Drydock Ships as defined in point (1) of Article 3(1) of Regulation (EU) No 1257/2013Maximum ship dimensions:Length: 415 metersWidth: 90 metersDraught: 7,8 meters Length: 415 meters Width: 90 meters Draught: 7,8 meters The ship recycling facility is regulated in accordance with applicable legislation and with the conditions set out in Environmental Permit of 7 November 2018 issued by the Municipality of Kerteminde. The Environmental Permit includes conditions for operating hours, special operating conditions, handling and storage of waste and also includes a condition that the activity must be carried out in a dry dock. Tacit approval, with a maximum review period of 14 days. 916,34(5) 22 May 2028
FAYARD A/S
Kystvejen 100
DK-5330 Munkebo
Denmark
Length: 415 meters
Width: 90 meters
Draught: 7,8 meters
Fornæs ApSRolshøjvej 12-168500 GrenaaDenmarkwww.fornaes.comPhone: +45 86326393Email:[email protected] Fornæs ApS Rolshøjvej 12-16 8500 Grenaa Denmark Alongside, drydock Ships as defined in point (1) of Article 3(1) of Regulation (EU) No 1257/2013Maximum ship dimensions:Length: 150 metersWidth: 25 metersDraught: 7 metersGT: 10 000 Length: 150 meters Width: 25 meters Draught: 7 meters The municipality of Norddjurs has the right to allocate hazardous waste for environmentally approved reception facilities. Tacit approval, with a maximum review period of 14 days. 30 000(6) 12 May 2026
Fornæs ApS
Rolshøjvej 12-16
8500 Grenaa
Denmark
Length: 150 meters
Width: 25 meters
Draught: 7 meters
Jatob Frederikshavn ApSLangerak 129900 FrederikshavnDenmarkwww.jatob.dkPhone: +45 8668 1689Email:[email protected]@jatob.dk Jatob Frederikshavn ApS Langerak 12 9900 Frederikshavn Denmark Alongside, slipway Ships as defined in point (1) of Article 3(1) of Regulation (EU) No 1257/2013Maximum ship dimensions:Length: 150 metersWidth: 30 metersDraught: 6 meters Length: 150 meters Width: 30 meters Draught: 6 meters Handling and storage of waste fractions is given by Environmental Authorization. Intermediate storage of hazardous waste may occur for up to one year at the site. Tacit approval, with a maximum review period of 14 days. 20 000(7) 16 September 2029
Jatob Frederikshavn ApS
Langerak 12
9900 Frederikshavn
Denmark
Length: 150 meters
Width: 30 meters
Draught: 6 meters
Modern American Recycling Services Europe (M.A.R.S)Sandholm 609900 FrederikshavnDenmarkwww.modernamericanrecyclingservices.com/Phone: +45 30307763Email:[email protected] Modern American Recycling Services Europe (M.A.R.S) Sandholm 60 9900 Frederikshavn Denmark Slipway Ships as defined in point (1) of Article 3(1) of Regulation (EU) No 1257/2013Maximum ship dimensions:Length: 400 meters Width: 90 meters Draught: 14 meters Length: 400 meters Width: 90 meters Draught: 14 meters The conditions under which the ship recycling facility operates are defined in the Environmental Permit of 9 March 2018 and Addendum to Environmental Permit of 12 July 2022 issued by the Municipality of Frederikshavn.The Municipality of Frederikshavn has the right to allocate hazardous waste to environmentally approved reception facilities.The facility must not store hazardous waste for more than one year. Tacit approval, with a review period of 14 days. 60 000(8) 27 January 2028
Modern American Recycling Services Europe (M.A.R.S)
Sandholm 60
9900 Frederikshavn
Denmark
Length: 400 meters Width: 90 meters Draught: 14 meters
Smedegaarden A/SVikingkaj 56700 EsbjergDenmarkwww.smedegaarden.netPhone: +45 75128888Email:[email protected] Smedegaarden A/S Vikingkaj 5 6700 Esbjerg Denmark Alongside, slipway Ships as defined in point (1) of Article 3(1) of Regulation (EU) No 1257/2013Maximum ship dimensions:Length: 200 meters*Width: 48 metersDraught: 7,5 meters(*If length > 170 meters, acceptation from the Municipality of Esbjerg is required) Length: 200 meters* Width: 48 meters Draught: 7,5 meters The conditions under which the ship recycling facility operates are defined in the Environmental Permit of 4 June 2015 issued by the Municipality of Esbjerg.The Municipality of Esbjerg has the right to allocate hazardous waste to environmentally approved reception facilities. Tacit approval, with a maximum review period of 14 days 20 000(9) 11 March 2026
Smedegaarden A/S
Vikingkaj 5
6700 Esbjerg
Denmark
Length: 200 meters*
Width: 48 meters
Draught: 7,5 meters
ESTONIA
Metruna OÜKopli 103, 11712 Tallinn, EstoniaPhone: +372 610 2933Fax +372 610 2444Email:[email protected] Metruna OÜ Kopli 103, 11712 Tallinn, Estonia Afloat at the quayside and in the floating dock Ships as defined in point (1) of Article 3(1) of Regulation (EU) No 1257/2013Maximum ship dimensions:Length: 197 metersWidth: 32 metersDraught: 9,6 meters Length: 197 meters Width: 32 meters Draught: 9,6 meters Waste permit No. KL-511809. Hazardous waste management licence No 0546. Rules of the Vene-Balti Port, Manual on Ships Recycling MSR-Refonda. Environmental Management System, Waste management EP 4.4.6-1-13The facility can recycle only the hazardous materials for which it has been licensed. Tacit approval, with a maximum review period of 30 days. 0(10) 15 February 2026
Metruna OÜ
Kopli 103, 11712 Tallinn, Estonia
Length: 197 meters
Width: 32 meters
Draught: 9,6 meters
SPAIN
DESGUACE INDUSTRIAL Y NAVAL, S.L.U. (DINA)Vega de Tapia, s/n48903 Barakaldo-BizkaiaSpainPhone: +34 944 971 552Email:[email protected] DESGUACE INDUSTRIAL Y NAVAL, S.L.U. (DINA) Vega de Tapia, s/n 48903 Barakaldo-Bizkaia Spain Alongside, dismantling ramp Ships as defined in point (1) of Article 3(1) of Regulation (EU) No 1257/2013Maximum ship dimensions:Length: 120 metersWidth: 20 metersDraught: 6 meters Length: 120 meters Width: 20 meters Draught: 6 meters The limitations are included in the integrated environmental authorisation. Tacit approval. The competent authority for approval is the environmental authority of the Autonomous Community where the facility is located. 2 086(11) 3 March 2026
DESGUACE INDUSTRIAL Y NAVAL, S.L.U. (DINA)
Vega de Tapia, s/n
48903 Barakaldo-Bizkaia
Spain
Length: 120 meters
Width: 20 meters
Draught: 6 meters
DDR VESSELS XXI, S.L.Port of “El Musel”GijonSpainPhone: +34 630 14 44 16Email:[email protected] DDR VESSELS XXI, S.L. Port of “El Musel” Gijon Spain Alongside, dismantling ramp Ships as defined in point (1) of Article 3(1) of Regulation (EU) No 1257/2013Maximum ship dimensions:Length: 169,9 meters(Ships above that size which can operate a zero rollover or negative ramp movement may be accepted depending on the outcome of a detailed feasibility study)Width: 25 meters Length: 169,9 meters(Ships above that size which can operate a zero rollover or negative ramp movement may be accepted depending on the outcome of a detailed feasibility study) Width: 25 meters The limitations are included in the integrated environmental authorisation. Tacit approval. The competent authority for approval is the environmental authority of the Autonomous Community where the facility is located. 3 600(12) 28 July 2025
DDR VESSELS XXI, S.L.
Port of “El Musel”
Gijon
Spain
Length: 169,9 meters(Ships above that size which can operate a zero rollover or negative ramp movement may be accepted depending on the outcome of a detailed feasibility study)
Width: 25 meters
FRANCE
Démonaval RecyclingZI du MalaquisRue François Arago76580 LE TRAITFrancePhone: (+ 33) (0)7 69 79 12 80Email:[email protected] Démonaval Recycling ZI du Malaquis Rue François Arago 76580 LE TRAIT France Alongside, drydock Ships as defined in point (1) of Article 3(1) of Regulation (EU) No 1257/2013Maximum ship dimensions:Length: 140 metersWidth: 25 metersDepth: 5 meters Length: 140 meters Width: 25 meters Depth: 5 meters Environmental limitations are defined in the prefectural authorisation. Explicit approval – The competent authority for the approval decision is the minister of environment 1 500(13) 21 September 2027
Démonaval Recycling
ZI du Malaquis
Rue François Arago
76580 LE TRAIT
France
Length: 140 meters
Width: 25 meters
Depth: 5 meters
GARDET & DE BEZENAC Recycling/ Groupe BAUDELET ENVIRONNEMENT – GIE MUG616, Boulevard Jules Durand76600 Le HavreFrancePhone: +33(0)2 35 95 16 34Email:[email protected] GARDET & DE BEZENAC Recycling / Groupe BAUDELET ENVIRONNEMENT – GIE MUG 616, Boulevard Jules Durand 76600 Le Havre France Floating and slipway Ships as defined in point (1) of Article 3(1) of Regulation (EU) No 1257/2013Maximum ship dimensions:Length: 150 metersWidth: 18 metersDepth: 7 metersLDT: 7 000 Length: 150 meters Width: 18 meters Depth: 7 meters Environmental limitations are defined in the prefectural authorisation. Explicit approval – The competent authority for the approval decision is the minister of environment. 7 730(14) 29 December 2026
GARDET & DE BEZENAC Recycling
/ Groupe BAUDELET ENVIRONNEMENT – GIE MUG
616, Boulevard Jules Durand
76600 Le Havre
France
Length: 150 meters
Width: 18 meters
Depth: 7 meters
Grand Port Maritime de Bordeaux152, Quai de Bacalan – CS 41320 – 33082 Bordeaux CedexFrancePhone: +33(0)5 56 90 58 00Email:[email protected] Grand Port Maritime de Bordeaux 152, Quai de Bacalan – CS 41320 – 33082 Bordeaux Cedex France Alongside, drydock Ships as defined in point (1) of Article 3(1) of Regulation (EU) No 1257/2013Maximum ship dimensions:Length: 240 metersWidth: 37 metersDepth: 17 meters Length: 240 meters Width: 37 meters Depth: 17 meters Environmental limitations are defined in the prefectural authorisation. Explicit approval – The competent authority for the approval decision is the minister of environment. 9 000(15) 27 September 2026
Grand Port Maritime de Bordeaux
152, Quai de Bacalan – CS 41320 – 33082 Bordeaux Cedex
France
Length: 240 meters
Width: 37 meters
Depth: 17 meters
Recycleurs Bretons – Navaléo170 rue Jacqueline Auriol29470 GuipavasFrancePhone: +33(0)2 98 03 29 98Email:[email protected] Recycleurs Bretons – Navaléo 170 rue Jacqueline Auriol 29470 Guipavas France Alongside, drydock Ships as defined in point (1) of Article 3(1) of Regulation (EU) No 1257/2013Maximum ship dimensions:Length: 220 metersWidth: 24 metersDepth: 10 meters Length: 220 meters Width: 24 meters Depth: 10 meters Environmental limitations are defined in the prefectural authorisation. Explicit approval – The competent authority for the approval decision is the minister of environment. 15 000(16) 24 May 2026
Recycleurs Bretons – Navaléo
170 rue Jacqueline Auriol
29470 Guipavas
France
Length: 220 meters
Width: 24 meters
Depth: 10 meters
ITALY
San Giorgio del Porto S.p.A.Calata Boccardo 816128 – Genova –ItalyPhone: +39 (0)10 251561Email:[email protected];[email protected] San Giorgio del Porto S.p.A. Calata Boccardo 8 16128 – Genova – Italy Alongside, drydock Ships as defined in point (1) of Article 3(1) of Regulation (EU) No 1257/2013Maximum ship dimensions:Length: 350 metersWidth: 75 metersDepth: 16 metersGT: 130 000 Length: 350 meters Width: 75 meters Depth: 16 meters The limitations and restrictions are included in the integrated environmental authorisation. Explicit approval 38 564(17) 6 June 2028
San Giorgio del Porto S.p.A.
Calata Boccardo 8
16128 – Genova –
Italy
Length: 350 meters
Width: 75 meters
Depth: 16 meters
LITHUANIA
UAB APKMinijos 180 (berth 133A), LT 93269, Klaipėda,LithuaniaPhone: +370 (46) 365776Fax +370 (46) 365776Email:[email protected] UAB APK Minijos 180 (berth 133A), LT 93269, Klaipėda, Lithuania Alongside (wet berth) Ships as defined in point (1) of Article 3(1) of Regulation (EU) No 1257/2013Maximum ship dimensions:Length: 130 metersWidth: 35 metersDepth: 10 metersGT: 3 500 Length: 130 meters Width: 35 meters Depth: 10 meters See national permit No. TL-KL.1-15/2015 Explicit approval – written notification in 30 working days 1 500(18) 12 March 2025
UAB APK
Minijos 180 (berth 133A), LT 93269, Klaipėda,
Lithuania
Length: 130 meters
Width: 35 meters
Depth: 10 meters
UAB ArmarMinijos 180 (berth 131A), LT 93269, Klaipėda,LithuaniaPhone: +370 685 32607Email:[email protected] UAB Armar Minijos 180 (berth 131A), LT 93269, Klaipėda, Lithuania Alongside (wet berth) Ships as defined in point (1) of Article 3(1) of Regulation (EU) No 1257/2013Maximum ship dimensions:Length: 80 metersWidth: 16 metersDepth: 5 metersGT: 1 500 Length: 80 meters Width: 16 meters Depth: 5 meters See national permit No. TL-KL.1-51/2017 Explicit approval – written notification in 30 working days 3 910(19) 12 April 2027
UAB Armar
Minijos 180 (berth 131A), LT 93269, Klaipėda,
Lithuania
Length: 80 meters
Width: 16 meters
Depth: 5 meters
THE NETHERLANDS
Damen Verolme Rotterdam B.V.Prof. Gerbrandyweg 253197 KK RotterdamThe NetherlandsPhone: +31 (0)181 23 4353Email:[email protected] Damen Verolme Rotterdam B.V. Prof. Gerbrandyweg 25 3197 KK Rotterdam The Netherlands Preparatory actions along the quayside, placed into drydock for scrapping Ships as defined in point (1) of Article 3(1) of Regulation (EU) No 1257/2013Maximum ship dimensions:Length: 400 metersWidth: 90 metersDepth: 12 metersHeight: 90 meters Length: 400 meters Width: 90 meters Depth: 12 meters Height: 90 meters The site has a permit to operate; this permit contains limitations and conditions to operate in an environmental sound manner. Explicit approval 0(20) 21 May 2026
Damen Verolme Rotterdam B.V.
Prof. Gerbrandyweg 25
3197 KK Rotterdam
The Netherlands
Length: 400 meters
Width: 90 meters
Depth: 12 meters
Height: 90 meters
DECOM Amsterdam B.V.Siciliëweg 10 1045 AS AmsterdamThe NetherlandsPhone: +31 23 558 1937Email:[email protected] DECOM Amsterdam B.V. Siciliëweg 10 1045 AS Amsterdam The Netherlands Preparatory actions along the quayside, lifted onshore for scrapping Ships as defined in point (1) of Article 3(1) of Regulation (EU) No 1257/2013Maximum ship dimensions:Length: 240 metersWidth: 50 metersDraught: 9 meters Length: 240 meters Width: 50 meters Draught: 9 meters The site has a permit to operate; this permit contains limitations and conditions to operate in an environmental sound manner. Explicit approval 17 500(21) 5 October 2026
DECOM Amsterdam B.V.
Siciliëweg 10 1045 AS Amsterdam
The Netherlands
Length: 240 meters
Width: 50 meters
Draught: 9 meters
Hoondert Services & Decommissioning B.V.Spanjeweg 44455 TW NieuwdorpThe NetherlandsPhone: +31 113352510Email:[email protected] Hoondert Services & Decommissioning B.V. Spanjeweg 4 4455 TW Nieuwdorp The Netherlands Preparatory actions along the quayside, lifted onshore for scrapping Ships as defined in point (1) of Article 3(1) of Regulation (EU) No 1257/2013Maximum ship dimensions:Length: 175 metersWidth: 40 metersDepth: 10 meters Length: 175 meters Width: 40 meters Depth: 10 meters The site has a permit to operate; this permit contains limitations and conditions to operate in an environmental sound manner. Explicit approval 30 000(22) 26 January 2026
Hoondert Services & Decommissioning B.V.
Spanjeweg 4
4455 TW Nieuwdorp
The Netherlands
Length: 175 meters
Width: 40 meters
Depth: 10 meters
Sagro Aannemingsmaatschappij Zeeland B.V.Estlandweg 10 4455 SV Nieuwdorp NETHERLANDSTel. +31 113351710Email:[email protected] Sagro Aannemingsmaatschappij Zeeland B.V. Estlandweg 10 4455 SV Nieuwdorp NETHERLANDS Preparatory actions along the quayside, lifted onshore for scrapping Ships as defined in point (1) of Article 3(1) of Regulation (EU) No 1257/2013Maximum ship dimensions:Length: 120 metersWidth: 20 metersDepth: 6 meters Length: 120 meters Width: 20 meters Depth: 6 meters The site has a permit to operate; this permit contains limitations and conditions to operate in an environmental sound manner. Explicit approval 15 000(23) 27 September 2029
Sagro Aannemingsmaatschappij Zeeland B.V.
Estlandweg 10 4455 SV Nieuwdorp NETHERLANDS
Length: 120 meters
Width: 20 meters
Depth: 6 meters
NORWAY
Arise Recycling AS (previously ADRS Decom Gulen)Facility address:Sløvågen 2,5960 Dalsøyra,NorwayOffice address:Statsminister Michelsens vei 38,5230 Paradis,Norwayhttps://adrs.no/ Arise Recycling AS (previously ADRS Decom Gulen) Facility address: Sløvågen 2, 5960 Dalsøyra, Norway Statsminister Michelsens vei 38, 5230 Paradis, Norway Alongside, slipway, dry/wet-dock Ships as defined in point (1) of Article 3(1) of Regulation (EU) No 1257/2013.Maximum ship dimensions:Length: 360 metersWidth: No limitDepth: No limit Length: 360 meters Width: No limit Depth: No limit See national permit No 2019.0501.T Explicit approval 0(24) 20 July 2029
Arise Recycling AS (previously ADRS Decom Gulen)
Facility address:
Sløvågen 2,
5960 Dalsøyra,
Norway
Statsminister Michelsens vei 38,
5230 Paradis,
Norway
Length: 360 meters
Width: No limit
Depth: No limit
AF Offshore DecomRaunesvegen 597,5578 Nedre VatsNorwayhttps://afgruppen.com/Decommissioning AF Offshore Decom Raunesvegen 597, 5578 Nedre Vats Norway Alongside, quayside Ships as defined in point (1) of Article 3(1) of Regulation (EU) No 1257/2013Maximum ship dimensions:Length: 500 metersWidth: no limitDepth: no limit Length: 500 meters Width: no limit Depth: no limit See national permit No 2005.0038.T Explicit approval 31 000(25) 10 December 2028(26)
AF Offshore Decom
Raunesvegen 597,
5578 Nedre Vats
Norway
Length: 500 meters
Width: no limit
Depth: no limit
Green Yard ASAngholmsveien 3044485 Feda,NorwayPhone: +4790098185www.greenyard.no Green Yard AS Angholmsveien 304 4485 Feda, Norway Drydock (indoors), slipway Ships as defined in point (1) of Article 3(1) of Regulation (EU) No 1257/2013Maximum ship dimensions:Length: 230 metersWidth: 25 metersDepth: 20 meters Length: 230 meters Width: 25 meters Depth: 20 meters See national permit No 2018.0833.TMajor dismantling operations must be performed indoors.The only dismantling and cutting operations that are allowed outside in open air are minor operations necessary to fit ships to the indoor facility. See permit for further details. Explicit approval 30 000(27) 10 December 2028(28)
Green Yard AS
Angholmsveien 304
4485 Feda,
Norway
Length: 230 meters
Width: 25 meters
Depth: 20 meters
Green Yard Kleven AS6065 UlsteinvikNorwaywww.kleven.no Green Yard Kleven AS 6065 Ulsteinvik Norway Alongside, slipway Ships as defined in point (1) of Article 3(1) of Regulation (EU) No 1257/2013Maximum ship dimensions:Length: 170 metersWidth: 35 metersDepth: No limit Length: 170 meters Width: 35 meters Depth: No limit See national permit No 2021.0011.T Explicit approval 0(29) 9 April 2026
Green Yard Kleven AS
6065 Ulsteinvik
Norway
Length: 170 meters
Width: 35 meters
Depth: No limit
Fosen Gjenvinning ASStokksundveien 1432,7177 RevsnesNorwayPhone: +47 400 39 479 Email:[email protected] Fosen Gjenvinning AS Stokksundveien 1432, 7177 Revsnes Norway Alongside Ships as defined in point (1) of Article 3(1) of Regulation (EU) No 1257/2013, with the exception of rigs or vessels used for extracting hydrocarbonsMaximum ship dimensions:Length: 150 metersWidth: 20 metersDepth: 7 meters Length: 150 meters Width: 20 meters Depth: 7 meters See national permit No 2006.0250.T Explicit approval 8 000(30) 10 December 2028(31)
Fosen Gjenvinning AS
Stokksundveien 1432,
7177 Revsnes
Norway
Length: 150 meters
Width: 20 meters
Depth: 7 meters
Aker Solutions AS (Stord)Eldøyane 595411 StordNorwaywww.kvaerner.com Aker Solutions AS (Stord) Eldøyane 59 5411 Stord Norway Alongside (wet berth), slipway Ships as defined in point (1) of Article 3(1) of Regulation (EU) No 1257/2013Maximum ship dimensions:Length: 230 metersWidth: No limitDepth: No limit Length: 230 meters Width: No limit Depth: No limit See national permit No 2013.0111.T Explicit approval 60 000(32) 10 December 2028(33)
Aker Solutions AS (Stord)
Eldøyane 59
5411 Stord
Norway
Length: 230 meters
Width: No limit
Depth: No limit
Norscrap West ASHanøytangen 122,5310 Hauglandhella,Norwaywww.norscrap.no Norscrap West AS Hanøytangen 122, 5310 Hauglandhella, Norway Floating slipway. Optional depending on complexity, in addition: 1. Dismantling by quay and subsequent scrapping on impermeable floors with effective drainage system. 2. Drydock Ships as defined in point (1) of Article 3(1) of Regulation (EU) No 1257/2013Maximum ship dimensions:Length: 150 metersWidth: 34 metersDraught: 5 meters /increasing depending on method of recycling. Width: 34 meters Draught: 5 meters /increasing depending on method of recycling. See national permit No 2017.0864.TMaximum 8 000 LDT on floating slipway. Ships exceeding 8 000 LDT need to be dismantled using another method of recycling Explicit approval 25 000(34) 10 December 2028(35)
Norscrap West AS
Hanøytangen 122,
5310 Hauglandhella,
Norway
Width: 34 meters
Draught: 5 meters /increasing depending on method of recycling.
FINLAND
Turun Korjaustelakka Oy (Turku Repair Yard Ltd)Navirentie, 21100 NaantaliFinlandPhone: +358 2 44 [email protected] Turun Korjaustelakka Oy (Turku Repair Yard Ltd) Navirentie, 21100 Naantali Finland Alongside, drydock Ships as defined in point (1) of Article 3(1) of Regulation (EU) No 1257/2013Maximum ship dimensions:Length: 250 metersWidth: 40 metersDraught: 7,9 meters Length: 250 meters Width: 40 meters Draught: 7,9 meters The limitations are included in the national environmental permit. Explicit approval 20 000(36) 14 December 2025
Turun Korjaustelakka Oy (Turku Repair Yard Ltd)
Navirentie, 21100 Naantali
Finland
Length: 250 meters
Width: 40 meters
Draught: 7,9 meters
UNITED KINGDOM – NORTHERN IRELAND
Harland and Wolff (Belfast) LtdQueen’s IslandBelfastBT3 9DUNorthern IrelandPhone +44(0)2890534189 Fax +44(0)[email protected] Harland and Wolff (Belfast) Ltd Queen’s Island Belfast BT3 9DU Northern Ireland Dry dock and wet berth Ships as defined in point (1) of Article 3(1) of Regulation (EU) No 1257/2013Maximum ship dimensions:Length: 556 metersWidth: 93 metersDraught: 7,5 metersDWT: 550 000 Length: 556 meters Width: 93 meters Draught: 7,5 meters The site is authorised by way of a waste management licence, authorisation number LN/20/11 that limits the operations and places conditions on the operator of the facility. Explicit approval 12 000(37) 16 June 2025
Harland and Wolff (Belfast) Ltd
Queen’s Island
Belfast
BT3 9DU
Northern Ireland
Length: 556 meters
Width: 93 meters
Draught: 7,5 meters
NV Galloo
Scheepszatestraat 9
9000 Gent
Belgium
Length: 366 meters
Width: 49 meters
Draught: 14,5 meters
FAYARD A/S
Kystvejen 100
DK-5330 Munkebo
Denmark
Length: 415 meters
Width: 90 meters
Draught: 7,8 meters
Fornæs ApS
Rolshøjvej 12-16
8500 Grenaa
Denmark
Length: 150 meters
Width: 25 meters
Draught: 7 meters
Jatob Frederikshavn ApS
Langerak 12
9900 Frederikshavn
Denmark
Length: 150 meters
Width: 30 meters
Draught: 6 meters
Modern American Recycling Services Europe (M.A.R.S)
Sandholm 60
9900 Frederikshavn
Denmark
Length: 400 meters Width: 90 meters Draught: 14 meters
Smedegaarden A/S
Vikingkaj 5
6700 Esbjerg
Denmark
Length: 200 meters*
Width: 48 meters
Draught: 7,5 meters
Metruna OÜ
Kopli 103, 11712 Tallinn, Estonia
Length: 197 meters
Width: 32 meters
Draught: 9,6 meters
DESGUACE INDUSTRIAL Y NAVAL, S.L.U. (DINA)
Vega de Tapia, s/n
48903 Barakaldo-Bizkaia
Spain
Length: 120 meters
Width: 20 meters
Draught: 6 meters
DDR VESSELS XXI, S.L.
Port of “El Musel”
Gijon
Spain
Length: 169,9 meters(Ships above that size which can operate a zero rollover or negative ramp movement may be accepted depending on the outcome of a detailed feasibility study)
Width: 25 meters
Démonaval Recycling
ZI du Malaquis
Rue François Arago
76580 LE TRAIT
France
Length: 140 meters
Width: 25 meters
Depth: 5 meters
GARDET & DE BEZENAC Recycling
/ Groupe BAUDELET ENVIRONNEMENT – GIE MUG
616, Boulevard Jules Durand
76600 Le Havre
France
Length: 150 meters
Width: 18 meters
Depth: 7 meters
Grand Port Maritime de Bordeaux
152, Quai de Bacalan – CS 41320 – 33082 Bordeaux Cedex
France
Length: 240 meters
Width: 37 meters
Depth: 17 meters
Recycleurs Bretons – Navaléo
170 rue Jacqueline Auriol
29470 Guipavas
France
Length: 220 meters
Width: 24 meters
Depth: 10 meters
San Giorgio del Porto S.p.A.
Calata Boccardo 8
16128 – Genova –
Italy
Length: 350 meters
Width: 75 meters
Depth: 16 meters
UAB APK
Minijos 180 (berth 133A), LT 93269, Klaipėda,
Lithuania
Length: 130 meters
Width: 35 meters
Depth: 10 meters
UAB Armar
Minijos 180 (berth 131A), LT 93269, Klaipėda,
Lithuania
Length: 80 meters
Width: 16 meters
Depth: 5 meters
Damen Verolme Rotterdam B.V.
Prof. Gerbrandyweg 25
3197 KK Rotterdam
The Netherlands
Length: 400 meters
Width: 90 meters
Depth: 12 meters
Height: 90 meters
DECOM Amsterdam B.V.
Siciliëweg 10 1045 AS Amsterdam
The Netherlands
Length: 240 meters
Width: 50 meters
Draught: 9 meters
Hoondert Services & Decommissioning B.V.
Spanjeweg 4
4455 TW Nieuwdorp
The Netherlands
Length: 175 meters
Width: 40 meters
Depth: 10 meters
Sagro Aannemingsmaatschappij Zeeland B.V.
Estlandweg 10 4455 SV Nieuwdorp NETHERLANDS
Length: 120 meters
Width: 20 meters
Depth: 6 meters
Arise Recycling AS (previously ADRS Decom Gulen)
Facility address:
Sløvågen 2,
5960 Dalsøyra,
Norway
Statsminister Michelsens vei 38,
5230 Paradis,
Norway
Length: 360 meters
Width: No limit
Depth: No limit
AF Offshore Decom
Raunesvegen 597,
5578 Nedre Vats
Norway
Length: 500 meters
Width: no limit
Depth: no limit
Green Yard AS
Angholmsveien 304
4485 Feda,
Norway
Length: 230 meters
Width: 25 meters
Depth: 20 meters
Green Yard Kleven AS
6065 Ulsteinvik
Norway
Length: 170 meters
Width: 35 meters
Depth: No limit
Fosen Gjenvinning AS
Stokksundveien 1432,
7177 Revsnes
Norway
Length: 150 meters
Width: 20 meters
Depth: 7 meters
Aker Solutions AS (Stord)
Eldøyane 59
5411 Stord
Norway
Length: 230 meters
Width: No limit
Depth: No limit
Norscrap West AS
Hanøytangen 122,
5310 Hauglandhella,
Norway
Width: 34 meters
Draught: 5 meters /increasing depending on method of recycling.
Turun Korjaustelakka Oy (Turku Repair Yard Ltd)
Navirentie, 21100 Naantali
Finland
Length: 250 meters
Width: 40 meters
Draught: 7,9 meters
Harland and Wolff (Belfast) Ltd
Queen’s Island
Belfast
BT3 9DU
Northern Ireland
Length: 556 meters
Width: 93 meters
Draught: 7,5 meters
Name of the facility Method of recycling Type and size of ships that can be recycled Limitations and conditions under which the ship recycling facility operates, including as regards hazardous waste management Details on the explicit or tacit procedure for the approval of the ship recycling plan by the competent authority(38) Maximum annual ship recycling output, calculated as the sum of the weight of ships expressed in LDT that have been recycled in a given year in that facility(39) Date of expiry of inclusion in the European List(40)
TÜRKIYE
Anadolu Gemi Söküm Orman Ürn. Gida Tur. Nak. San. Ve Tic. A.Ş.Gemi Söküm Tesisleri Parsel No:16 Aliağaİzmir 35800,TürkiyePhone: +90 232 618 21 02Email:[email protected] Anadolu Gemi Söküm Orman Ürn. Gida Tur. Nak. San. Ve Tic. A.Ş. Gemi Söküm Tesisleri Parsel No:16 Aliağa İzmir 35800, Türkiye Landing Ships as defined in Article 3(1), point (1), of Regulation (EU) No 1257/2013.Maximum ship dimensions:Length: no limitWidth: 50 metresDraught: 12 metres Length: no limit Width: 50 metres Draught: 12 metres The site has a Ship Dismantling Permit, issued by the Ministry of Environment, Urbanisation and Climate Change, and a Ship Dismantling Authorisation Certificate, issued by the Ministry of Transport and Infrastructure, which contain limitations and conditions under which the facility operates. Tacit approval, with a maximum review period of 15 days.The ship recycling plan (SRP) is part of a set of documents, surveys and permits/licences that are submitted to the competent authorities in order to obtain permission to dismantle a ship. The SRP is neither explicitly approved nor rejected as a standalone document. 111 823(41) 17 August 2028
Anadolu Gemi Söküm Orman Ürn. Gida Tur. Nak. San. Ve Tic. A.Ş.
Gemi Söküm Tesisleri Parsel No:16 Aliağa
İzmir 35800,
Türkiye
Length: no limit
Width: 50 metres
Draught: 12 metres
Avsar Gemi Sokum San. Dis Tic. Ltd. Şti.Gemi Söküm Tesisleri,Parcel 5 Aliağaİzmir 35800,TürkiyePhone: +90 232 618 21 07 – 08 – 09Email:[email protected] Avsar Gemi Sokum San. Dis Tic. Ltd. Şti. Gemi Söküm Tesisleri, Parcel 5 Aliağa İzmir 35800, Türkiye Landing Ships as defined in Article 3(1), point (1), of Regulation (EU) No 1257/2013, with the exception of floating platforms.Maximum ship dimensions:Length: no limitWidth: 50 metersDraught: 15 meters Length: no limit Width: 50 meters Draught: 15 meters The site has a Ship Dismantling Permit, issued by the Ministry of Environment, Urbanisation and Climate Change, and a Ship Dismantling Authorisation Certificate, issued by the Ministry of Transport and Infrastructure, which contain limitations and conditions under which the facility operates. Tacit approval, with a maximum review period of 15 days.The ship recycling plan (SRP) is part of a set of documents, surveys and permits/licences that are submitted to the competent authorities in order to obtain permission to dismantle a ship. The SRP is neither explicitly approved nor rejected as a standalone document. 54 224(42) 2 December 2025
Avsar Gemi Sokum San. Dis Tic. Ltd. Şti.
Gemi Söküm Tesisleri,
Parcel 5 Aliağa
İzmir 35800,
Türkiye
Length: no limit
Width: 50 meters
Draught: 15 meters
BMS GEMİ GERİ DÖNÜŞÜM SAN. VE TİC. A.Ş.Atatürk Mah. Aygaz Cad. No:27 Aliaga, İzmir 35800,TürkiyePhone: +90 232 618 22 20Email:[email protected] BMS GEMİ GERİ DÖNÜŞÜM SAN. VE TİC. A.Ş. Atatürk Mah. Aygaz Cad. No:27 Aliaga, İzmir 35800, Türkiye Landing Ships as defined in Article 3(1), point (1), of Regulation (EU) No 1257/2013, with the exception of floating platformsMaximum ship dimensions:Length: no limitWidth: 49 metresDraught: 10 metres Length: no limit Width: 49 metres Draught: 10 metres The site has a Ship Dismantling Permit, issued by the Ministry of Environment, Urbanisation and Climate Change, and a Ship Dismantling Authorisation Certificate, issued by the Ministry of Transport and Infrastructure, which contain limitations and conditions under which the facility operates. Tacit approval, with a maximum review period of 15 days.The ship recycling plan (SRP) is part of a set of documents, surveys and permits/licences that are submitted to the competent authorities in order to obtain permission to dismantle a ship. The SRP is neither explicitly approved nor rejected as a standalone document. 37 132(43) 17 August 2028
BMS GEMİ GERİ DÖNÜŞÜM SAN. VE TİC. A.Ş.
Atatürk Mah. Aygaz Cad. No:27 Aliaga, İzmir 35800,
Türkiye
Length: no limit
Width: 49 metres
Draught: 10 metres
DORTEL GEMI SOKUM DEMIR CELİK SANAYİ VE TIC.LTD. Şti.Gemi Söküm Tesisleri Parsel No:45 Aliağaİzmir 35800,TürkiyePhone: +90 232 618 2118Email:[email protected] DORTEL GEMI SOKUM DEMIR CELİK SANAYİ VE TIC.LTD. Şti. Gemi Söküm Tesisleri Parsel No:45 Aliağa İzmir 35800, Türkiye Landing Ships as defined in Article 3(1), point (1), of Regulation (EU) No 1257/2013, with the exception of floating platformsMaximum ship dimensions:Length: no limitWidth: 49 metresDraught: 25 metres Length: no limit Width: 49 metres Draught: 25 metres The site has a Ship Dismantling Permit, issued by the Ministry of Environment, Urbanisation and Climate Change, and a Ship Dismantling Authorisation Certificate, issued by the Ministry of Transport and Infrastructure, which contain limitations and conditions under which the facility operates. Tacit approval, with a maximum review period of 15 days.The ship recycling plan (SRP) is part of a set of documents, surveys and permits/licences that are submitted to the competent authorities in order to obtain permission to dismantle a ship. The SRP is neither explicitly approved nor rejected as a standalone document. 41 268(44) 20 July 2029
DORTEL GEMI SOKUM DEMIR CELİK SANAYİ VE TIC.LTD. Şti.
Gemi Söküm Tesisleri Parsel No:45 Aliağa
İzmir 35800,
Türkiye
Length: no limit
Width: 49 metres
Draught: 25 metres
EGE GEMI SÖKÜM SAN. VE TIC. A.Ş.Gemi Söküm Tesisleri,Parcel 17 Aliağa,Izmir 35800,TürkiyePhone: +90 232 618 20 11Email:[email protected] EGE GEMI SÖKÜM SAN. VE TIC. A.Ş. Gemi Söküm Tesisleri, Parcel 17 Aliağa, Izmir 35800, Türkiye Landing Ships as defined in Article 3(1), point (1), of Regulation (EU) No 1257/2013, with the exception of floating platformsMaximum ship dimensions:Length: no limitWidth: 49 metersDraught: 25 meters Length: no limit Width: 49 meters Draught: 25 meters The site has a Ship Dismantling Permit, issued by the Ministry of Environment, Urbanisation and Climate Change, and a Ship Dismantling Authorisation Certificate, issued by the Ministry of Transport and Infrastructure, which contain limitations and conditions under which the facility operates. Tacit approval, with a maximum review period of 15 days.The ship recycling plan (SRP) is part of a set of documents, surveys and permits/licences that are submitted to the competent authorities in order to obtain permission to dismantle a ship. The SRP is neither explicitly approved nor rejected as a standalone document. 34 986(45) 20 July 2029
EGE GEMI SÖKÜM SAN. VE TIC. A.Ş.
Gemi Söküm Tesisleri,
Parcel 17 Aliağa,
Izmir 35800,
Türkiye
Length: no limit
Width: 49 meters
Draught: 25 meters
LEYAL GEMİ SÖKÜM SANAYİ ve TİCARET LTD.Gemi Söküm Tesisleri,Parcel 3-4 Aliağa,Izmir 35800,TürkiyePhone: +90 232 618 20 30Email:[email protected] LEYAL GEMİ SÖKÜM SANAYİ ve TİCARET LTD. Gemi Söküm Tesisleri, Parcel 3-4 Aliağa, Izmir 35800, Türkiye Landing Ships as defined in Article 3(1), point (1),of Regulation (EU) No 1257/2013Maximum ship dimensions:Length: no limitWidth: 100 metersDraught: 15 meters Length: no limit Width: 100 meters Draught: 15 meters The site has a Ship Dismantling Permit, issued by the Ministry of Environment, Urbanisation and Climate Change, and a Ship Dismantling Authorisation Certificate, issued by the Ministry of Transport and Infrastructure, which contain limitations and conditions under which the facility operates. Tacit approval, with a maximum review period of 15 daysThe ship recycling plan (SRP) is part of a set of documents, surveys and permits/licences that are submitted to the competent authorities in order to obtain permission to dismantle a ship. The SRP is neither explicitly approved nor rejected as a standalone document. 64 815(46) 10 December 2028
LEYAL GEMİ SÖKÜM SANAYİ ve TİCARET LTD.
Gemi Söküm Tesisleri,
Parcel 3-4 Aliağa,
Izmir 35800,
Türkiye
Length: no limit
Width: 100 meters
Draught: 15 meters
LEYAL-DEMTAŞ GEMİ SÖKÜM SANAYİ ve TİCARET A.Ş.Gemi Söküm Tesisleri,Parcel 25 Aliağa,Izmir 35800,TürkiyePhone: +90 232 618 20 65Email:[email protected] LEYAL-DEMTAŞ GEMİ SÖKÜM SANAYİ ve TİCARET A.Ş. Gemi Söküm Tesisleri, Parcel 25 Aliağa, Izmir 35800, Türkiye Landing Ships as defined in Article 3(1), point (1), of Regulation (EU) No 1257/2013Maximum ship dimensions:Length: no limitWidth: 63 metersDraught: 15 meters Length: no limit Width: 63 meters Draught: 15 meters The site has a Ship Dismantling Permit, issued by Ministry of Environment, Urbanisation and Climate Change, and a Ship Dismantling Authorisation Certificate, issued by the Ministry of Transport and Infrastructure, which contain limitations and conditions under which the facility operates. Tacit approval, with a maximum review period of 15 daysThe ship recycling plan (SRP) is part of a set of documents, surveys and permits/licences that are submitted to the competent authorities in order to obtain permission to dismantle a ship. The SRP is neither explicitly approved nor rejected as a standalone document. 57 275(47) 10 December 2028
LEYAL-DEMTAŞ GEMİ SÖKÜM SANAYİ ve TİCARET A.Ş.
Gemi Söküm Tesisleri,
Parcel 25 Aliağa,
Izmir 35800,
Türkiye
Length: no limit
Width: 63 meters
Draught: 15 meters
KILIÇLAR GERİ DÖNÜŞÜMLÜ MADDELER VE METAL SAN. TİC A.Ş.Atatürk Mahallesi, Aygaz Caddesi No: 57 20 nolu parsel Aliaga – İzmir 35800, TürkiyePhone: +90 232 618 22 17Email:[email protected] KILIÇLAR GERİ DÖNÜŞÜMLÜ MADDELER VE METAL SAN. TİC A.Ş. Atatürk Mahallesi, Aygaz Caddesi No: 57 20 nolu parsel Aliaga – İzmir 35800, Türkiye Landing Ships as defined in Article 3(1), point (1), of Regulation (EU) No 1257/2013, with the exception of floating platformsMaximum ship dimensions:Length: no limitWidth: 49 metresDraught: 15 metres Length: no limit Width: 49 metres Draught: 15 metres The site has a Ship Dismantling Permit, issued by Ministry of Environment, Urbanisation and Climate Change, and a Ship Dismantling Authorisation Certificate, issued by the Ministry of Transport and Infrastructure, which contain limitations and conditions under which the facility operates. Tacit approval, with a maximum review period of 15 days.The ship recycling plan (SRP) is part of a set of documents, surveys and permits/licences that are submitted to the competent authorities in order to obtain permission to dismantle a ship. The SRP is neither explicitly approved nor rejected as a standalone document. 16 711(48) 17 August 2028
KILIÇLAR GERİ DÖNÜŞÜMLÜ MADDELER VE METAL SAN. TİC A.Ş.
Atatürk Mahallesi, Aygaz Caddesi No: 57 20 nolu parsel Aliaga – İzmir 35800, Türkiye
Length: no limit
Width: 49 metres
Draught: 15 metres
ÖGE GEMİ SÖKÜM İTH. İHR. TİC. SAN. A.Ş.Gemi Söküm Tesisleri,Parcel 23 Aliağa,Izmir 35800,TürkiyePhone: +90 232 618 21 05Email:[email protected] ÖGE GEMİ SÖKÜM İTH. İHR. TİC. SAN. A.Ş. Gemi Söküm Tesisleri, Parcel 23 Aliağa, Izmir 35800, Türkiye Landing Ships as defined in Article 3(1), point (1), of Regulation (EU) No 1257/2013Maximum ship dimensions:Length: no limitWidth: 70 metersDraught: 15 meters Length: no limit Width: 70 meters Draught: 15 meters The site has a Ship Dismantling Permit, issued by Ministry of Environment, Urbanisation and Climate Change, and a Ship Dismantling Authorisation Certificate, issued by the Ministry of Transport and Infrastructure, which contain limitations and conditions under which the facility operates. Tacit approval, with a maximum review period of 15 daysThe ship recycling plan (SRP) is part of a set of documents, surveys and permits/licences that are submitted to the competent authorities in order to obtain permission to dismantle a ship. The SRP is neither explicitly approved nor rejected as a standalone document. 62 471(49) 22 February 2030
ÖGE GEMİ SÖKÜM İTH. İHR. TİC. SAN. A.Ş.
Gemi Söküm Tesisleri,
Parcel 23 Aliağa,
Izmir 35800,
Türkiye
Length: no limit
Width: 70 meters
Draught: 15 meters
Sök Denizcilik Tic. Ltd. Şti.Gemi Söküm Tesisleri,Parcel 8-9 Aliağa,Izmir 35800,TürkiyePhone: +90 232 618 2092Email:[email protected] Sök Denizcilik Tic. Ltd. Şti. Gemi Söküm Tesisleri, Parcel 8-9 Aliağa, Izmir 35800, Türkiye Landing Ships as defined in Article 3(1), point (1), of Regulation (EU) No 1257/2013Maximum ship dimensions:Length: no limitWidth: 90 metersDraught: 15 meters Length: no limit Width: 90 meters Draught: 15 meters The site has a Ship Dismantling Permit, issued by Ministry of Environment, Urbanisation and Climate Change, and a Ship Dismantling Authorisation Certificate, issued by the Ministry of Transport and Infrastructure, which contain limitations and conditions under which the facility operates. Tacit approval, with a maximum review period of 15 daysThe ship recycling plan (SRP) is part of a set of documents, surveys and permits/licences that are submitted to the competent authorities in order to obtain permission to dismantle a ship. The SRP is neither explicitly approved nor rejected as a standalone document. 74 996(50) 22 February 2030
Sök Denizcilik Tic. Ltd. Şti.
Gemi Söküm Tesisleri,
Parcel 8-9 Aliağa,
Izmir 35800,
Türkiye
Length: no limit
Width: 90 meters
Draught: 15 meters
TEMURTAŞLAR GEMİ SÖKÜM İTHALAT ve İHRACAAT SAN. ve TİC. A.Ş.Atatürk Mahallesi Aygaz Caddesi No:55 19 Nolu Parsel Aliağa-İZMİR 35800TürkiyePhone: +90 232 618 21 13Email:[email protected] TEMURTAŞLAR GEMİ SÖKÜM İTHALAT ve İHRACAAT SAN. ve TİC. A.Ş. Atatürk Mahallesi Aygaz Caddesi No:55 19 Nolu Parsel Aliağa-İZMİR 35800 Türkiye Landing Ships as defined in Article 3(1), point (1), of Regulation (EU) No 1257/2013Maximum ship dimensions:Length: no limitWidth: 49 metersDraught: 12 meters Length: no limit Width: 49 meters Draught: 12 meters The site has a Ship Dismantling Permit, issued by Ministry of Environment, Urbanisation and Climate Change, and a Ship Dismantling Authorisation Certificate, issued by the Ministry of Transport and Infrastructure, which contain limitations and conditions under which the facility operates. Tacit approval, with a maximum review period of 15 daysThe ship recycling plan (SRP) is part of a set of documents, surveys and permits/licences that are submitted to the competent authorities in order to obtain permission to dismantle a ship. The SRP is neither explicitly approved nor rejected as a standalone document. 12 340(51) 22 February 2030
TEMURTAŞLAR GEMİ SÖKÜM İTHALAT ve İHRACAAT SAN. ve TİC. A.Ş.
Atatürk Mahallesi Aygaz Caddesi No:55 19 Nolu Parsel Aliağa-İZMİR 35800
Türkiye
Length: no limit
Width: 49 meters
Draught: 12 meters
UNITED KINGDOM
Dales Marine Services LtdImperial Dry DockLeithEdinburghEH6 7DRUnited KingdomPhone: + 44 (0)131 454 3380; + 44 (0)7834 658 588Email:[email protected] Dales Marine Services Ltd Imperial Dry Dock Leith Edinburgh EH6 7DR United Kingdom Drydock and wet berth Ships as defined in Article 3(1), point (1), of Regulation (EU) No 1257/2013, with the exception of rigsMaximum ship dimensions:Length: 165 metersWidth: 20 metersDraught: 7,7 meters Length: 165 meters Width: 20 meters Draught: 7,7 meters The site is authorised by way of a waste management licence, authorisation number WML/L/1157331 that limits the operations and places conditions on the operator of the facility. Explicit approval 5 019(52) 22 May 2027
Dales Marine Services Ltd
Imperial Dry Dock
Leith
Edinburgh
EH6 7DR
United Kingdom
Length: 165 meters
Width: 20 meters
Draught: 7,7 meters
Kishorn Port LtdKishorn BaseKishornStrathcarronIV54 8XAUnited KingdomPhone: +44 (0)139 777 3840Email:[email protected]@[email protected] Kishorn Port Ltd Kishorn Base Kishorn Strathcarron IV54 8XA United Kingdom Drydock Ships as defined in Article 3(1), point (1), of Regulation (EU) No 1257/2013Maximum ship dimensions:Length: 160 metersWidth: 160 metersDraught: 13,8 metersLDT: 26 448 Length: 160 meters Width: 160 meters Draught: 13,8 meters The site is authorised by way of a waste management licence, authorisation number “WML/L/1175043 Modification 01” and “WML/L/1175043 Modification 02” that limits the operations and places conditions on the operator of the facility. Explicit approval 38 148(53) 22 May 2027
Kishorn Port Ltd
Kishorn Base
Kishorn
Strathcarron
IV54 8XA
United Kingdom
Length: 160 meters
Width: 160 meters
Draught: 13,8 meters
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
International Shipbreaking Limited L.L.C18601 R.L Ostos Road Brownsville TX, 78521United StatesPhone: +1 956-831-2299Email:[email protected]@internationalshipbreaking.com International Shipbreaking Limited L.L.C 18601 R.L Ostos Road Brownsville TX, 78521 United States Alongside (wet berth), slope Ships as defined in Article 3(1), point (1), of Regulation (EU) No 1257/2013Maximum ship dimensions:Length: 366 meters Width: 48 meters Draught: 9 meters The conditions under which the facility is authorised to operate are defined in permits, certificates and authorizations issued to the facility by the Environmental Protection Agency, the Texas Commission of Environmental Quality, the Texas General Land Office and the U.S Coast Guard.The U.S. Toxic Substances Control Act prohibits the import into the US of foreign flagged vessels that contain PCB concentrations greater than 50 parts per million.The facility has two slips with ramps for final vessel recycling (East Slip and West Slip). Ships flying a flag of EU Member States shall be recycled exclusively on the East Slip ramp. There is currently no procedure in US law related to the approval of ship recycling plans 120 000(54) 10 December 2028
International Shipbreaking Limited L.L.C
18601 R.L Ostos Road Brownsville TX, 78521
United States
Anadolu Gemi Söküm Orman Ürn. Gida Tur. Nak. San. Ve Tic. A.Ş.
Gemi Söküm Tesisleri Parsel No:16 Aliağa
İzmir 35800,
Türkiye
Length: no limit
Width: 50 metres
Draught: 12 metres
Avsar Gemi Sokum San. Dis Tic. Ltd. Şti.
Gemi Söküm Tesisleri,
Parcel 5 Aliağa
İzmir 35800,
Türkiye
Length: no limit
Width: 50 meters
Draught: 15 meters
BMS GEMİ GERİ DÖNÜŞÜM SAN. VE TİC. A.Ş.
Atatürk Mah. Aygaz Cad. No:27 Aliaga, İzmir 35800,
Türkiye
Length: no limit
Width: 49 metres
Draught: 10 metres
DORTEL GEMI SOKUM DEMIR CELİK SANAYİ VE TIC.LTD. Şti.
Gemi Söküm Tesisleri Parsel No:45 Aliağa
İzmir 35800,
Türkiye
Length: no limit
Width: 49 metres
Draught: 25 metres
EGE GEMI SÖKÜM SAN. VE TIC. A.Ş.
Gemi Söküm Tesisleri,
Parcel 17 Aliağa,
Izmir 35800,
Türkiye
Length: no limit
Width: 49 meters
Draught: 25 meters
LEYAL GEMİ SÖKÜM SANAYİ ve TİCARET LTD.
Gemi Söküm Tesisleri,
Parcel 3-4 Aliağa,
Izmir 35800,
Türkiye
Length: no limit
Width: 100 meters
Draught: 15 meters
LEYAL-DEMTAŞ GEMİ SÖKÜM SANAYİ ve TİCARET A.Ş.
Gemi Söküm Tesisleri,
Parcel 25 Aliağa,
Izmir 35800,
Türkiye
Length: no limit
Width: 63 meters
Draught: 15 meters
KILIÇLAR GERİ DÖNÜŞÜMLÜ MADDELER VE METAL SAN. TİC A.Ş.
Atatürk Mahallesi, Aygaz Caddesi No: 57 20 nolu parsel Aliaga – İzmir 35800, Türkiye
Length: no limit
Width: 49 metres
Draught: 15 metres
ÖGE GEMİ SÖKÜM İTH. İHR. TİC. SAN. A.Ş.
Gemi Söküm Tesisleri,
Parcel 23 Aliağa,
Izmir 35800,
Türkiye
Length: no limit
Width: 70 meters
Draught: 15 meters
Sök Denizcilik Tic. Ltd. Şti.
Gemi Söküm Tesisleri,
Parcel 8-9 Aliağa,
Izmir 35800,
Türkiye
Length: no limit
Width: 90 meters
Draught: 15 meters
TEMURTAŞLAR GEMİ SÖKÜM İTHALAT ve İHRACAAT SAN. ve TİC. A.Ş.
Atatürk Mahallesi Aygaz Caddesi No:55 19 Nolu Parsel Aliağa-İZMİR 35800
Türkiye
Length: no limit
Width: 49 meters
Draught: 12 meters
Dales Marine Services Ltd
Imperial Dry Dock
Leith
Edinburgh
EH6 7DR
United Kingdom
Length: 165 meters
Width: 20 meters
Draught: 7,7 meters
Kishorn Port Ltd
Kishorn Base
Kishorn
Strathcarron
IV54 8XA
United Kingdom
Length: 160 meters
Width: 160 meters
Draught: 13,8 meters
International Shipbreaking Limited L.L.C
18601 R.L Ostos Road Brownsville TX, 78521
United States
THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,
Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,
Having regard to Regulation (EU) No 1257/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 November 2013 on ship recycling and amending Regulation (EC) No 1013/2006 and Directive 2009/16/EC (1), and in particular Article 16(4) thereof,
Whereas:
(1) Article 6(2), point (a), of Regulation (EU) No 1257/2013 requires ship owners to ensure that ships destined to be recycled are only recycled at ship recycling facilities included in the European List of ship recycling facilities (‘European List’) published pursuant to Article 16(2) of that Regulation.
(2) The European List is set out in Commission Implementing Decision (EU) 2016/2323 (2).
(3) The authorisation of NV Galloo Recycling Ghent, a ship recycling facility located in Belgium is due to expire on 31 March 2025. The Commission has received information from the competent authorities in Belgium that the authorisation to conduct ship recycling granted to that facility has been renewed for a period of five years prior to its expiry, in accordance with Article 14 of Regulation (EU) No 1257/2013. Furthermore, the competent authorities in Belgium informed the Commission that the facility NV Galloo Recycling Ghent has changed name to NV Galloo and has notified new maximum ship dimensions that the facility can accept. The European List should therefore be updated to reflect those changes.
(4) The authorisation of Jatob Frederikshavn ApS, a ship recycling facility located in Denmark is due to expire on 9 March 2025. The competent authorities in Denmark informed the Commission that the authorisation to conduct ship recycling granted to that facility has been renewed for a period of five years prior to its expiry, in accordance with Article 14 of Regulation (EU) No 1257/2013. They also informed about a change to the maximum annual ship recycling output. The European List should therefore be updated to reflect those changes.
(5) The authorisation of Les Recycleurs Bretons-Navaléo, a ship recycling facility located in France is due to expire on 19 June 2025. The Commission has received information from the competent authorities in France that the authorisation to conduct ship recycling granted to that facility has been renewed for a period of five years prior to its expiry, in accordance with Article 14 of Regulation (EU) No 1257/2013. Furthermore, the competent authorities in France informed the Commission about changes in the contact details of the ship recycling facility Les Recycleurs Bretons-Navaléo and new maximum ship dimensions that the facility can accept. The European List should therefore be updated to reflect those changes.
(6) The competent authorities in the Netherlands have informed the Commission that the ship recycling facility Sagro Aannemingsmaatschappij Zeeland B.V. located in the Netherlands has been authorised in accordance with Article 14 of Regulation (EU) No 1257/2013. The Netherlands has provided the Commission with all information relevant for that facility to be included in the European List. That ship recycling facility should therefore be included in the European List.
(7) The inclusion in the European List of Galaksis N., a ship recycling facility located in Latvia, expired on 17 July 2024. The competent authorities in Latvia have informed the Commission about the change of the operator of the ship recycling facility and requested to reflect the change of the name of the facility accordingly, the other conditions of the permit remaining unchanged. However, since the authorisation to conduct ship recycling was granted for an unlimited period, it was not issued in accordance with Article 14 of Regulation (EU) No 1257/2013. Therefore, the requested changes should not be included and Galaksis N. should be removed from the European List.
(8) The authorisation of UAB Vakarų refonda, a ship recycling facility located in Lithuania is due to expire on 30 April 2025 and the competent authority in Lithuania informed the Commission that the permit was withdrawn upon request of the facility. That ship recycling facility should therefore be removed from the European List.
(9) The inclusion in the European List of BLRT Refonda Baltic OÜ, a ship recycling facility located in Estonia is due to expire on 15 February 2026. The competent authorities in Estonia have informed the Commission about the change of the operator of the ship recycling facility to Metruna OÜ and requested to reflect the change of the name of the facility accordingly, the other conditions of the permit remaining unchanged. The European List should therefore be updated to reflect that change.
(10) The Commission has received an application to be included in the European List, in accordance with Article 15(1) of Regulation (EU) No 1257/2013 for Temurtaşlar Gemi Söküm İthalat İhracat San. Ve Tic. A.Ş., a ship recycling facility located in Türkiye. Having assessed the information and supporting evidence provided and gathered in accordance with Article 15 of that Regulation, the Commission considers that the facility complies with the requirements set out in Article 13 of that Regulation to conduct ship recycling and to be included in the European List. Temurtaşlar Gemi Söküm İthalat İhracat San. Ve Tic. A.Ş. should therefore be included in the European List.
(11) The inclusion in the European List of Sök Denizcilik Tic. Ltd. Şti. and Öge Gemi Söküm İth. İhr.Tİc. San. A.Ş., ship recycling facilities located in Türkiye, are due to expire on 12 February 2025. The Commission has received information from those facilities that they wish to renew their inclusion in the European List in accordance with Article 15 of Regulation (EU) No 1257/2013. Having assessed the information and supporting evidence provided and gathered in accordance with Article 15 of Regulation (EU) No 1257/2013, including through inspections, the Commission considers that the facilities comply with the requirements set out in Article 13 of that Regulation to conduct ship recycling and to be included in the European List. The inclusion of those ship recycling facilities in the European List should therefore be renewed.
(12) The inclusion in the European List of Ege Celik San. Ve Tic A.Ş., a ship recycling facility located in Turkiye is due to expire on 12 February 2025. The Commission has received information from that facility that it wishes to renew its inclusion in the European List in accordance with Article 15 of Regulation (EU) No 1257/2013. Having assessed the information and supporting evidence provided and gathered in accordance with Article 15 of Regulation (EU) No 1257/2013, including through inspections, the Commission considers that the facility has failed to comply with certain requirements of Article 13(1), points (e), (f), (g) and (i) of that Article. The facility has failed to take adequate measures to maintain the hull integrity in order to control any leakage in the intertidal zone. The facility cut the primary hull while below the drainage line without the use of a slag collector and handled waste on the shoreline without an impermeable floor. The facility also failed to follow their own procedures aimed at ensuring that possible flammable materials are removed prior to cutting, which has posed a high risk to the safety of workers. Ege Celik San. Ve Tic A.Ş. should therefore be removed from the European List.
(13) Implementing Decision (EU) 2016/2323 should therefore be amended accordingly.
(14) The measures provided for in this Decision are in accordance with the opinion of the Committee established by Article 25 of Regulation (EU) No 1257/2013,
HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
The Annex to Implementing Decision (EU) 2016/2323 is replaced by the text in the Annex to this Decision.
This Decision shall enter into force on the third day following that of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.

‘ANNEX
The European List of ship recycling facilities referred to in Article 16 of Regulation (EU) No 1257/2013
Part A
Ship recycling facilities located in a Member State
Name of the facility
Method of recycling
Type and size of ships that can be recycled
Limitations and conditions under which the ship recycling facility operates, including as regards hazardous waste management
Details on the explicit or tacit procedure for the approval of the ship recycling plan by the competent authority (1) Maximum annual ship recycling output, calculated as the sum of the weight of ships expressed in LDT that have been recycled in a given year in that facility (2) Date of expiry of inclusion in the European List (3) BELGIUM
NV Galloo
Scheepszatestraat 9
9000 Gent
Belgium
Phone: +32(0)9/251 25 21
Email: [email protected]
Alongside (wet berth), slope
Ships as defined in point (1) of Article 3(1) of Regulation (EU) No 1257/2013
Maximum ship dimensions:

Length: 366 meters

Width: 49 meters

Draught: 14,5 meters

Tacit approval, with a maximum review period of 30 days
34 000 (4) 31 March 2030
DENMARK
FAYARD A/S
Kystvejen 100
DK-5330 Munkebo
Denmark
www.fayard.dk
Phone: +45 7592 0000
Email: [email protected]
Drydock
Ships as defined in point (1) of Article 3(1) of Regulation (EU) No 1257/2013
Maximum ship dimensions:

Length: 415 meters

Width: 90 meters

Draught: 7,8 meters
The ship recycling facility is regulated in accordance with applicable legislation and with the conditions set out in Environmental Permit of 7 November 2018 issued by the Municipality of Kerteminde. The Environmental Permit includes conditions for operating hours, special operating conditions, handling and storage of waste and also includes a condition that the activity must be carried out in a dry dock.
Tacit approval, with a maximum review period of 14 days.
916,34 (5) 22 May 2028
Fornæs ApS
Rolshøjvej 12-16
8500 Grenaa
Denmark
www.fornaes.com
Phone: +45 86326393
Email: [email protected]
Alongside, drydock
Ships as defined in point (1) of Article 3(1) of Regulation (EU) No 1257/2013
Maximum ship dimensions:

Length: 150 meters

Width: 25 meters

Draught: 7 meters
GT: 10 000
The municipality of Norddjurs has the right to allocate hazardous waste for environmentally approved reception facilities.
Tacit approval, with a maximum review period of 14 days.
30 000 (6) 12 May 2026
Jatob Frederikshavn ApS
Langerak 12
9900 Frederikshavn
Denmark
www.jatob.dk
Phone: +45 8668 1689
Email: [email protected]
[email protected]
Alongside, slipway
Ships as defined in point (1) of Article 3(1) of Regulation (EU) No 1257/2013
Maximum ship dimensions:

Length: 150 meters

Width: 30 meters

Draught: 6 meters
Handling and storage of waste fractions is given by Environmental Authorization. Intermediate storage of hazardous waste may occur for up to one year at the site.
Tacit approval, with a maximum review period of 14 days.
20 000 (7) 16 September 2029
Modern American Recycling Services Europe (M.A.R.S)
Sandholm 60
9900 Frederikshavn
Denmark
www.modernamericanrecyclingservices.com/
Phone: +45 30307763
Email: [email protected]
Slipway
Ships as defined in point (1) of Article 3(1) of Regulation (EU) No 1257/2013
Maximum ship dimensions:

Length: 400 meters Width: 90 meters Draught: 14 meters
The conditions under which the ship recycling facility operates are defined in the Environmental Permit of 9 March 2018 and Addendum to Environmental Permit of 12 July 2022 issued by the Municipality of Frederikshavn.
The Municipality of Frederikshavn has the right to allocate hazardous waste to environmentally approved reception facilities.
The facility must not store hazardous waste for more than one year.
Tacit approval, with a review period of 14 days.
60 000 (8) 27 January 2028
Smedegaarden A/S
Vikingkaj 5
6700 Esbjerg
Denmark
www.smedegaarden.net
Phone: +45 75128888
Email:
[email protected]
Alongside, slipway
Ships as defined in point (1) of Article 3(1) of Regulation (EU) No 1257/2013
Maximum ship dimensions:

Length: 200 meters*

Width: 48 meters

Draught: 7,5 meters
(*If length > 170 meters, acceptation from the Municipality of Esbjerg is required)
The conditions under which the ship recycling facility operates are defined in the Environmental Permit of 4 June 2015 issued by the Municipality of Esbjerg.
The Municipality of Esbjerg has the right to allocate hazardous waste to environmentally approved reception facilities.
Tacit approval, with a maximum review period of 14 days
20 000 (9) 11 March 2026
ESTONIA
Metruna OÜ
Kopli 103, 11712 Tallinn, Estonia
Phone: +372 610 2933
Fax +372 610 2444
Email: [email protected]
www.metruna.ee
Afloat at the quayside and in the floating dock
Ships as defined in point (1) of Article 3(1) of Regulation (EU) No 1257/2013
Maximum ship dimensions:

Length: 197 meters

Width: 32 meters

Draught: 9,6 meters
Waste permit No. KL-511809. Hazardous waste management licence No 0546. Rules of the Vene-Balti Port, Manual on Ships Recycling MSR-Refonda. Environmental Management System, Waste management EP 4.4.6-1-13
The facility can recycle only the hazardous materials for which it has been licensed.
Tacit approval, with a maximum review period of 30 days.
0 (10) 15 February 2026
SPAIN
DESGUACE INDUSTRIAL Y NAVAL, S.L.U. (DINA)
Vega de Tapia, s/n
48903 Barakaldo-Bizkaia
Spain
Phone: +34 944 971 552
Email: [email protected]
www.redena.es
Alongside, dismantling ramp
Ships as defined in point (1) of Article 3(1) of Regulation (EU) No 1257/2013
Maximum ship dimensions:

Length: 120 meters

Width: 20 meters

Draught: 6 meters
The limitations are included in the integrated environmental authorisation.
Tacit approval. The competent authority for approval is the environmental authority of the Autonomous Community where the facility is located.
2 086 (11) 3 March 2026
DDR VESSELS XXI, S.L.
Port of “El Musel”
Gijon
Spain
Phone: +34 630 14 44 16
Email: [email protected]
Alongside, dismantling ramp
Ships as defined in point (1) of Article 3(1) of Regulation (EU) No 1257/2013
Maximum ship dimensions:

Length: 169,9 meters
(Ships above that size which can operate a zero rollover or negative ramp movement may be accepted depending on the outcome of a detailed feasibility study)

Width: 25 meters
The limitations are included in the integrated environmental authorisation.
Tacit approval. The competent authority for approval is the environmental authority of the Autonomous Community where the facility is located.
3 600 (12) 28 July 2025
FRANCE
Démonaval Recycling
ZI du Malaquis
Rue François Arago
76580 LE TRAIT
France
Phone: (+ 33) (0)7 69 79 12 80
Email:
[email protected]
Alongside, drydock
Ships as defined in point (1) of Article 3(1) of Regulation (EU) No 1257/2013
Maximum ship dimensions:

Length: 140 meters

Width: 25 meters

Depth: 5 meters
Environmental limitations are defined in the prefectural authorisation.
Explicit approval – The competent authority for the approval decision is the minister of environment
1 500 (13) 21 September 2027
GARDET & DE BEZENAC Recycling
/ Groupe BAUDELET ENVIRONNEMENT – GIE MUG
616, Boulevard Jules Durand
76600 Le Havre
France
Phone: +33(0)2 35 95 16 34
Email: [email protected]
Floating and slipway
Ships as defined in point (1) of Article 3(1) of Regulation (EU) No 1257/2013
Maximum ship dimensions:

Length: 150 meters

Width: 18 meters

Depth: 7 meters
LDT: 7 000
Environmental limitations are defined in the prefectural authorisation.
Explicit approval – The competent authority for the approval decision is the minister of environment.
7 730 (14) 29 December 2026
Grand Port Maritime de Bordeaux
152, Quai de Bacalan – CS 41320 – 33082 Bordeaux Cedex
France
Phone: +33(0)5 56 90 58 00
Email: [email protected]
Alongside, drydock
Ships as defined in point (1) of Article 3(1) of Regulation (EU) No 1257/2013
Maximum ship dimensions:

Length: 240 meters

Width: 37 meters

Depth: 17 meters
Environmental limitations are defined in the prefectural authorisation.
Explicit approval – The competent authority for the approval decision is the minister of environment.
9 000 (15) 27 September 2026
Recycleurs Bretons – Navaléo
170 rue Jacqueline Auriol
29470 Guipavas
France
Phone: +33(0)2 98 03 29 98
Email: [email protected]
Alongside, drydock
Ships as defined in point (1) of Article 3(1) of Regulation (EU) No 1257/2013
Maximum ship dimensions:

Length: 220 meters

Width: 24 meters

Depth: 10 meters
Environmental limitations are defined in the prefectural authorisation.
Explicit approval – The competent authority for the approval decision is the minister of environment.
15 000 (16) 24 May 2026
ITALY
San Giorgio del Porto S.p.A.
Calata Boccardo 8
16128 – Genova –
Italy
Phone: +39 (0)10 251561
Email:
[email protected];
[email protected]
www.sgdp.it
Alongside, drydock
Ships as defined in point (1) of Article 3(1) of Regulation (EU) No 1257/2013
Maximum ship dimensions:

Length: 350 meters

Width: 75 meters

Depth: 16 meters
GT: 130 000
The limitations and restrictions are included in the integrated environmental authorisation.
Explicit approval
38 564 (17) 6 June 2028
LITHUANIA
UAB APK
Minijos 180 (berth 133A), LT 93269, Klaipėda,
Lithuania
Phone: +370 (46) 365776
Fax +370 (46) 365776
Email: [email protected]
Alongside (wet berth)
Ships as defined in point (1) of Article 3(1) of Regulation (EU) No 1257/2013
Maximum ship dimensions:

Length: 130 meters

Width: 35 meters

Depth: 10 meters
GT: 3 500
See national permit No. TL-KL.1-15/2015
Explicit approval – written notification in 30 working days
1 500 (18) 12 March 2025
UAB Armar
Minijos 180 (berth 131A), LT 93269, Klaipėda,
Lithuania
Phone: +370 685 32607
Email: [email protected]
Alongside (wet berth)
Ships as defined in point (1) of Article 3(1) of Regulation (EU) No 1257/2013
Maximum ship dimensions:

Length: 80 meters

Width: 16 meters

Depth: 5 meters
GT: 1 500
See national permit No. TL-KL.1-51/2017
Explicit approval – written notification in 30 working days
3 910 (19) 12 April 2027
THE NETHERLANDS
Damen Verolme Rotterdam B.V.
Prof. Gerbrandyweg 25
3197 KK Rotterdam
The Netherlands
Phone: +31 (0)181 23 4353
Email: [email protected]
Preparatory actions along the quayside, placed into drydock for scrapping
Ships as defined in point (1) of Article 3(1) of Regulation (EU) No 1257/2013
Maximum ship dimensions:

Length: 400 meters

Width: 90 meters

Depth: 12 meters

Height: 90 meters
The site has a permit to operate; this permit contains limitations and conditions to operate in an environmental sound manner.
Explicit approval
0 (20) 21 May 2026
DECOM Amsterdam B.V.
Siciliëweg 10 1045 AS Amsterdam
The Netherlands
Phone: +31 23 558 1937
Email: [email protected]
Preparatory actions along the quayside, lifted onshore for scrapping
Ships as defined in point (1) of Article 3(1) of Regulation (EU) No 1257/2013
Maximum ship dimensions:

Length: 240 meters

Width: 50 meters

Draught: 9 meters
The site has a permit to operate; this permit contains limitations and conditions to operate in an environmental sound manner.
Explicit approval
17 500 (21) 5 October 2026
Hoondert Services & Decommissioning B.V.
Spanjeweg 4
4455 TW Nieuwdorp
The Netherlands
Phone: +31 113352510
Email: [email protected]
Preparatory actions along the quayside, lifted onshore for scrapping
Ships as defined in point (1) of Article 3(1) of Regulation (EU) No 1257/2013
Maximum ship dimensions:

Length: 175 meters

Width: 40 meters

Depth: 10 meters
The site has a permit to operate; this permit contains limitations and conditions to operate in an environmental sound manner.
Explicit approval
30 000 (22) 26 January 2026
Sagro Aannemingsmaatschappij Zeeland B.V.
Estlandweg 10 4455 SV Nieuwdorp NETHERLANDS
Tel. +31 113351710
Email: [email protected]
Preparatory actions along the quayside, lifted onshore for scrapping
Ships as defined in point (1) of Article 3(1) of Regulation (EU) No 1257/2013
Maximum ship dimensions:

Length: 120 meters

Width: 20 meters

Depth: 6 meters
The site has a permit to operate; this permit contains limitations and conditions to operate in an environmental sound manner.
Explicit approval
15 000 (23) 27 September 2029
NORWAY
Arise Recycling AS (previously ADRS Decom Gulen)
Facility address:
Sløvågen 2,
5960 Dalsøyra,
Norway
Office address:
Statsminister Michelsens vei 38,
5230 Paradis,
Norway
https://adrs.no/
Alongside, slipway, dry/wet-dock
Ships as defined in point (1) of Article 3(1) of Regulation (EU) No 1257/2013. Maximum ship dimensions:

Length: 360 meters

Width: No limit

Depth: No limit
See national permit No 2019.0501.T
Explicit approval
0 (24) 20 July 2029
AF Offshore Decom
Raunesvegen 597,
5578 Nedre Vats
Norway
https://afgruppen.com/Decommissioning
Alongside, quayside
Ships as defined in point (1) of Article 3(1) of Regulation (EU) No 1257/2013
Maximum ship dimensions:

Length: 500 meters

Width: no limit

Depth: no limit
See national permit No 2005.0038.T
Explicit approval
31 000 (25) 10 December 2028 (26) Green Yard AS
Angholmsveien 304
4485 Feda,
Norway
Phone: +4790098185
www.greenyard.no
Drydock (indoors), slipway
Ships as defined in point (1) of Article 3(1) of Regulation (EU) No 1257/2013
Maximum ship dimensions:

Length: 230 meters

Width: 25 meters

Depth: 20 meters
See national permit No 2018.0833.T
Major dismantling operations must be performed indoors.
The only dismantling and cutting operations that are allowed outside in open air are minor operations necessary to fit ships to the indoor facility. See permit for further details.
Explicit approval
30 000 (27) 10 December 2028 (28) Green Yard Kleven AS
6065 Ulsteinvik
Norway
www.kleven.no
Alongside, slipway
Ships as defined in point (1) of Article 3(1) of Regulation (EU) No 1257/2013
Maximum ship dimensions:

Length: 170 meters

Width: 35 meters

Depth: No limit
See national permit No 2021.0011.T
Explicit approval
0 (29) 9 April 2026
Fosen Gjenvinning AS
Stokksundveien 1432,
7177 Revsnes
Norway
Phone: +47 400 39 479 Email: [email protected]
Alongside
Ships as defined in point (1) of Article 3(1) of Regulation (EU) No 1257/2013, with the exception of rigs or vessels used for extracting hydrocarbons
Maximum ship dimensions:

Length: 150 meters

Width: 20 meters

Depth: 7 meters
See national permit No 2006.0250.T
Explicit approval
8 000 (30) 10 December 2028 (31) Aker Solutions AS (Stord)
Eldøyane 59
5411 Stord
Norway
www.kvaerner.com
Alongside (wet berth), slipway
Ships as defined in point (1) of Article 3(1) of Regulation (EU) No 1257/2013
Maximum ship dimensions:

Length: 230 meters

Width: No limit

Depth: No limit
See national permit No 2013.0111.T
Explicit approval
60 000 (32) 10 December 2028 (33) Norscrap West AS
Hanøytangen 122,
5310 Hauglandhella,
Norway
www.norscrap.no
Floating slipway. Optional depending on complexity, in addition: 1. Dismantling by quay and subsequent scrapping on impermeable floors with effective drainage system. 2. Drydock
Ships as defined in point (1) of Article 3(1) of Regulation (EU) No 1257/2013
Maximum ship dimensions:
Length: 150 meters

Width: 34 meters

Draught: 5 meters /increasing depending on method of recycling.
See national permit No 2017.0864.T
Maximum 8 000 LDT on floating slipway. Ships exceeding 8 000 LDT need to be dismantled using another method of recycling
Explicit approval
25 000 (34) 10 December 2028 (35) FINLAND
Turun Korjaustelakka Oy (Turku Repair Yard Ltd)
Navirentie, 21100 Naantali
Finland
Phone: +358 2 44 511
Email [email protected]
Alongside, drydock
Ships as defined in point (1) of Article 3(1) of Regulation (EU) No 1257/2013
Maximum ship dimensions:

Length: 250 meters

Width: 40 meters

Draught: 7,9 meters
The limitations are included in the national environmental permit.
Explicit approval
20 000 (36) 14 December 2025
UNITED KINGDOM – NORTHERN IRELAND
Harland and Wolff (Belfast) Ltd
Queen’s Island
Belfast
BT3 9DU
Northern Ireland
Phone +44(0)2890534189 Fax +44(0)2890458515
Email [email protected]
Dry dock and wet berth
Ships as defined in point (1) of Article 3(1) of Regulation (EU) No 1257/2013
Maximum ship dimensions:

Length: 556 meters

Width: 93 meters

Draught: 7,5 meters
DWT: 550 000
The site is authorised by way of a waste management licence, authorisation number LN/20/11 that limits the operations and places conditions on the operator of the facility.
Explicit approval
12 000 (37) 16 June 2025
Part B
Ship recycling facilities located in a third country
Name of the facility
Method of recycling
Type and size of ships that can be recycled
Limitations and conditions under which the ship recycling facility operates, including as regards hazardous waste management
Details on the explicit or tacit procedure for the approval of the ship recycling plan by the competent authority (38) Maximum annual ship recycling output, calculated as the sum of the weight of ships expressed in LDT that have been recycled in a given year in that facility (39) Date of expiry of inclusion in the European List (40) TÜRKIYE
Anadolu Gemi Söküm Orman Ürn. Gida Tur. Nak. San. Ve Tic. A.Ş.
Gemi Söküm Tesisleri Parsel No:16 Aliağa
İzmir 35800,
Türkiye
Phone: +90 232 618 21 02
Email: [email protected]
Landing
Ships as defined in Article 3(1), point (1), of Regulation (EU) No 1257/2013. Maximum ship dimensions:

Length: no limit

Width: 50 metres

Draught: 12 metres
The site has a Ship Dismantling Permit, issued by the Ministry of Environment, Urbanisation and Climate Change, and a Ship Dismantling Authorisation Certificate, issued by the Ministry of Transport and Infrastructure, which contain limitations and conditions under which the facility operates.
Tacit approval, with a maximum review period of 15 days.
The ship recycling plan (SRP) is part of a set of documents, surveys and permits/licences that are submitted to the competent authorities in order to obtain permission to dismantle a ship. The SRP is neither explicitly approved nor rejected as a standalone document.
111 823 (41) 17 August 2028
Avsar Gemi Sokum San. Dis Tic. Ltd. Şti.
Gemi Söküm Tesisleri,
Parcel 5 Aliağa
İzmir 35800,
Türkiye
Phone: +90 232 618 21 07 – 08 – 09
Email: [email protected]
Landing
Ships as defined in Article 3(1), point (1), of Regulation (EU) No 1257/2013, with the exception of floating platforms.
Maximum ship dimensions:

Length: no limit

Width: 50 meters

Draught: 15 meters
The site has a Ship Dismantling Permit, issued by the Ministry of Environment, Urbanisation and Climate Change, and a Ship Dismantling Authorisation Certificate, issued by the Ministry of Transport and Infrastructure, which contain limitations and conditions under which the facility operates.
Tacit approval, with a maximum review period of 15 days.
The ship recycling plan (SRP) is part of a set of documents, surveys and permits/licences that are submitted to the competent authorities in order to obtain permission to dismantle a ship. The SRP is neither explicitly approved nor rejected as a standalone document.
54 224 (42) 2 December 2025
BMS GEMİ GERİ DÖNÜŞÜM SAN. VE TİC. A.Ş.
Atatürk Mah. Aygaz Cad. No:27 Aliaga, İzmir 35800,
Türkiye
Phone: +90 232 618 22 20
Email: [email protected]
Landing
Ships as defined in Article 3(1), point (1), of Regulation (EU) No 1257/2013, with the exception of floating platforms
Maximum ship dimensions:

Length: no limit

Width: 49 metres

Draught: 10 metres
The site has a Ship Dismantling Permit, issued by the Ministry of Environment, Urbanisation and Climate Change, and a Ship Dismantling Authorisation Certificate, issued by the Ministry of Transport and Infrastructure, which contain limitations and conditions under which the facility operates.
Tacit approval, with a maximum review period of 15 days.
The ship recycling plan (SRP) is part of a set of documents, surveys and permits/licences that are submitted to the competent authorities in order to obtain permission to dismantle a ship. The SRP is neither explicitly approved nor rejected as a standalone document.
37 132 (43) 17 August 2028
DORTEL GEMI SOKUM DEMIR CELİK SANAYİ VE TIC.LTD. Şti.
Gemi Söküm Tesisleri Parsel No:45 Aliağa
İzmir 35800,
Türkiye
Phone: +90 232 618 2118
Email: [email protected]
Landing
Ships as defined in Article 3(1), point (1), of Regulation (EU) No 1257/2013, with the exception of floating platforms
Maximum ship dimensions:

Length: no limit

Width: 49 metres

Draught: 25 metres
The site has a Ship Dismantling Permit, issued by the Ministry of Environment, Urbanisation and Climate Change, and a Ship Dismantling Authorisation Certificate, issued by the Ministry of Transport and Infrastructure, which contain limitations and conditions under which the facility operates.
Tacit approval, with a maximum review period of 15 days.
The ship recycling plan (SRP) is part of a set of documents, surveys and permits/licences that are submitted to the competent authorities in order to obtain permission to dismantle a ship. The SRP is neither explicitly approved nor rejected as a standalone document.
41 268 (44) 20 July 2029
EGE GEMI SÖKÜM SAN. VE TIC. A.Ş.
Gemi Söküm Tesisleri,
Parcel 17 Aliağa,
Izmir 35800,
Türkiye
Phone: +90 232 618 20 11
Email: [email protected]
Landing
Ships as defined in Article 3(1), point (1), of Regulation (EU) No 1257/2013, with the exception of floating platforms
Maximum ship dimensions:

Length: no limit

Width: 49 meters

Draught: 25 meters
The site has a Ship Dismantling Permit, issued by the Ministry of Environment, Urbanisation and Climate Change, and a Ship Dismantling Authorisation Certificate, issued by the Ministry of Transport and Infrastructure, which contain limitations and conditions under which the facility operates.
Tacit approval, with a maximum review period of 15 days.
The ship recycling plan (SRP) is part of a set of documents, surveys and permits/licences that are submitted to the competent authorities in order to obtain permission to dismantle a ship. The SRP is neither explicitly approved nor rejected as a standalone document.
34 986 (45) 20 July 2029
LEYAL GEMİ SÖKÜM SANAYİ ve TİCARET LTD.
Gemi Söküm Tesisleri,
Parcel 3-4 Aliağa,
Izmir 35800,
Türkiye
Phone: +90 232 618 20 30
Email: [email protected]
Landing
Ships as defined in Article 3(1), point (1),of Regulation (EU) No 1257/2013
Maximum ship dimensions:

Length: no limit

Width: 100 meters

Draught: 15 meters
The site has a Ship Dismantling Permit, issued by the Ministry of Environment, Urbanisation and Climate Change, and a Ship Dismantling Authorisation Certificate, issued by the Ministry of Transport and Infrastructure, which contain limitations and conditions under which the facility operates.
Tacit approval, with a maximum review period of 15 days
The ship recycling plan (SRP) is part of a set of documents, surveys and permits/licences that are submitted to the competent authorities in order to obtain permission to dismantle a ship. The SRP is neither explicitly approved nor rejected as a standalone document.
64 815 (46) 10 December 2028
LEYAL-DEMTAŞ GEMİ SÖKÜM SANAYİ ve TİCARET A.Ş.
Gemi Söküm Tesisleri,
Parcel 25 Aliağa,
Izmir 35800,
Türkiye
Phone: +90 232 618 20 65
Email: [email protected]
Landing
Ships as defined in Article 3(1), point (1), of Regulation (EU) No 1257/2013
Maximum ship dimensions:

Length: no limit

Width: 63 meters

Draught: 15 meters
The site has a Ship Dismantling Permit, issued by Ministry of Environment, Urbanisation and Climate Change, and a Ship Dismantling Authorisation Certificate, issued by the Ministry of Transport and Infrastructure, which contain limitations and conditions under which the facility operates.
Tacit approval, with a maximum review period of 15 days
The ship recycling plan (SRP) is part of a set of documents, surveys and permits/licences that are submitted to the competent authorities in order to obtain permission to dismantle a ship. The SRP is neither explicitly approved nor rejected as a standalone document.
57 275 (47) 10 December 2028
KILIÇLAR GERİ DÖNÜŞÜMLÜ MADDELER VE METAL SAN. TİC A.Ş.
Atatürk Mahallesi, Aygaz Caddesi No: 57 20 nolu parsel Aliaga – İzmir 35800, Türkiye
Phone: +90 232 618 22 17
Email: [email protected]
www.kiliclarshiprecycling.com
Landing
Ships as defined in Article 3(1), point (1), of Regulation (EU) No 1257/2013, with the exception of floating platforms
Maximum ship dimensions:

Length: no limit

Width: 49 metres

Draught: 15 metres
The site has a Ship Dismantling Permit, issued by Ministry of Environment, Urbanisation and Climate Change, and a Ship Dismantling Authorisation Certificate, issued by the Ministry of Transport and Infrastructure, which contain limitations and conditions under which the facility operates.
Tacit approval, with a maximum review period of 15 days.
The ship recycling plan (SRP) is part of a set of documents, surveys and permits/licences that are submitted to the competent authorities in order to obtain permission to dismantle a ship. The SRP is neither explicitly approved nor rejected as a standalone document.
16 711 (48) 17 August 2028
ÖGE GEMİ SÖKÜM İTH. İHR. TİC. SAN. A.Ş.
Gemi Söküm Tesisleri,
Parcel 23 Aliağa,
Izmir 35800,
Türkiye
Phone: +90 232 618 21 05
Email: [email protected]
www.ogegemi.com
Landing
Ships as defined in Article 3(1), point (1), of Regulation (EU) No 1257/2013
Maximum ship dimensions:

Length: no limit

Width: 70 meters

Draught: 15 meters
The site has a Ship Dismantling Permit, issued by Ministry of Environment, Urbanisation and Climate Change, and a Ship Dismantling Authorisation Certificate, issued by the Ministry of Transport and Infrastructure, which contain limitations and conditions under which the facility operates.
Tacit approval, with a maximum review period of 15 days
The ship recycling plan (SRP) is part of a set of documents, surveys and permits/licences that are submitted to the competent authorities in order to obtain permission to dismantle a ship. The SRP is neither explicitly approved nor rejected as a standalone document.
62 471 (49) 22 February 2030
Sök Denizcilik Tic. Ltd. Şti.
Gemi Söküm Tesisleri,
Parcel 8-9 Aliağa,
Izmir 35800,
Türkiye
Phone: +90 232 618 2092
Email: [email protected]
Landing
Ships as defined in Article 3(1), point (1), of Regulation (EU) No 1257/2013
Maximum ship dimensions:

Length: no limit

Width: 90 meters

Draught: 15 meters
The site has a Ship Dismantling Permit, issued by Ministry of Environment, Urbanisation and Climate Change, and a Ship Dismantling Authorisation Certificate, issued by the Ministry of Transport and Infrastructure, which contain limitations and conditions under which the facility operates.
Tacit approval, with a maximum review period of 15 days
The ship recycling plan (SRP) is part of a set of documents, surveys and permits/licences that are submitted to the competent authorities in order to obtain permission to dismantle a ship. The SRP is neither explicitly approved nor rejected as a standalone document.
74 996 (50) 22 February 2030
TEMURTAŞLAR GEMİ SÖKÜM İTHALAT ve İHRACAAT SAN. ve TİC. A.Ş.
Atatürk Mahallesi Aygaz Caddesi No:55 19 Nolu Parsel Aliağa-İZMİR 35800
Türkiye
Phone: +90 232 618 21 13
Email: [email protected]
Landing
Ships as defined in Article 3(1), point (1), of Regulation (EU) No 1257/2013
Maximum ship dimensions:

Length: no limit

Width: 49 meters

Draught: 12 meters
The site has a Ship Dismantling Permit, issued by Ministry of Environment, Urbanisation and Climate Change, and a Ship Dismantling Authorisation Certificate, issued by the Ministry of Transport and Infrastructure, which contain limitations and conditions under which the facility operates.
Tacit approval, with a maximum review period of 15 days
The ship recycling plan (SRP) is part of a set of documents, surveys and permits/licences that are submitted to the competent authorities in order to obtain permission to dismantle a ship. The SRP is neither explicitly approved nor rejected as a standalone document.
12 340 (51) 22 February 2030
UNITED KINGDOM
Dales Marine Services Ltd
Imperial Dry Dock
Leith
Edinburgh
EH6 7DR
United Kingdom
Phone: + 44 (0)131 454 3380; + 44 (0)7834 658 588
Email: [email protected]
Drydock and wet berth
Ships as defined in Article 3(1), point (1), of Regulation (EU) No 1257/2013, with the exception of rigs
Maximum ship dimensions:

Length: 165 meters

Width: 20 meters

Draught: 7,7 meters
The site is authorised by way of a waste management licence, authorisation number WML/L/1157331 that limits the operations and places conditions on the operator of the facility.
Explicit approval
5 019 (52) 22 May 2027
Kishorn Port Ltd
Kishorn Base
Kishorn
Strathcarron
IV54 8XA
United Kingdom
Phone: +44 (0)139 777 3840
Email: [email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
Drydock
Ships as defined in Article 3(1), point (1), of Regulation (EU) No 1257/2013
Maximum ship dimensions:

Length: 160 meters

Width: 160 meters

Draught: 13,8 meters
LDT: 26 448
The site is authorised by way of a waste management licence, authorisation number “WML/L/1175043 Modification 01” and “WML/L/1175043 Modification 02” that limits the operations and places conditions on the operator of the facility.
Explicit approval
38 148 (53) 22 May 2027
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
International Shipbreaking Limited L.L.C
18601 R.L Ostos Road Brownsville TX, 78521
United States
Phone: +1 956-831-2299
Email: [email protected]
[email protected]
Alongside (wet berth), slope
Ships as defined in Article 3(1), point (1), of Regulation (EU) No 1257/2013
Maximum ship dimensions:
Length: 366 meters Width: 48 meters Draught: 9 meters
The conditions under which the facility is authorised to operate are defined in permits, certificates and authorizations issued to the facility by the Environmental Protection Agency, the Texas Commission of Environmental Quality, the Texas General Land Office and the U.S Coast Guard.
The U.S. Toxic Substances Control Act prohibits the import into the US of foreign flagged vessels that contain PCB concentrations greater than 50 parts per million.
The facility has two slips with ramps for final vessel recycling (East Slip and West Slip). Ships flying a flag of EU Member States shall be recycled exclusively on the East Slip ramp.
There is currently no procedure in US law related to the approval of ship recycling plans
120 000 (54) 10 December 2028
’

(1) As referred to in Article 7(3) of Regulation (EU) No 1257/2013.

(2) As referred to in Article 32(1), point (a), third sentence, of Regulation (EU) No 1257/2013.

(3) The date of expiry of inclusion in the European List corresponds to the date of expiry of the permit or authorisation granted to the facility in the Member State.

(4) According to the information submitted, the theoretical maximum annual ship recycling capacity of the facility is 50 000 LDT per year.

(5) According to the information submitted, the theoretical maximum annual ship recycling capacity of the facility is 30 000 LDT per year.

(6) According to the information submitted, the theoretical maximum annual ship recycling capacity of the facility is 50 000 LDT per year.

(7) According to the information submitted, the theoretical maximum annual ship recycling capacity of the facility is 30 000 LDT per year.

(8) According to the information submitted, the theoretical maximum annual ship recycling capacity of the facility is 200 000 LDT per year.

(9) According to the information submitted, the theoretical maximum annual ship recycling capacity of the facility is 50 000 LDT per year.

(10) According to the information submitted, the theoretical maximum annual ship recycling capacity of the facility is 36 000 LDT per year.

(11) According to the information submitted, the theoretical maximum annual ship recycling capacity of the facility is 6 000 LDT per year.

(12) According to the information submitted, the theoretical maximum annual ship recycling capacity of the facility is 60 000 LDT per year.

(13) According to the information submitted, the theoretical maximum annual ship recycling capacity of the facility is 15 000 LDT per year.

(14) According to the information submitted, the theoretical maximum annual ship recycling capacity of the facility is 12 000 LDT per year.

(15) According to the information submitted, the theoretical maximum annual ship recycling capacity of the facility is 23 000 LDT per year.

(16) According to the information submitted, the theoretical maximum annual ship recycling capacity of the facility is 25 000 LDT per year.

(17) According to the information submitted, the theoretical maximum annual ship recycling capacity of the facility is 60 000 LDT per year.

(18) According to its permit, the facility is authorised to recycle a maximum 30 000 LDT per year.

(19) According to its permit, the facility is authorised to recycle a maximum 6 000 LDT per year.

(20) According to its permit, the theoretical maximum annual ship recycling capacity of the facility is 100 000 LDT per year.

(21) According to its permit, the theoretical maximum annual ship recycling capacity of the facility is 47 500 LDT per year.

(22) According to its permit, the theoretical maximum annual ship recycling capacity of the facility is 100 000 LDT per year.

(23) According to its permit, the theoretical maximum annual ship recycling capacity of the facility is 100 000 LDT per year.

(24) According to its permit, the facility is authorised to recycle a maximum 75 000 LDT per year

(25) According to its permit, the facility is authorised to recycle a maximum 75 000 LDT per year.

(26) This date of expiry is set by reference to a period of validity corresponding to five years from the date of entry into force of this Decision.

(27) According to its permit, the facility is authorised to recycle a maximum 30 000 LDT per year.

(28) This date of expiry is set by reference to a period of validity corresponding to five years from the date of entry into force of this Decision.

(29) According to its permit, the facility is authorised to recycle a maximum 30 000 LDT per year.

(30) According to its permit, the facility is authorised to recycle a maximum 10 000 LDT per year.

(31) This date of expiry is set by reference to a period of validity corresponding to five years from the date of entry into force of this Decision.

(32) According to its permit, the facility is authorised to recycle a maximum 85 000 LDT per year.

(33) This date of expiry is set by reference to a period of validity corresponding to five years from the date of entry into force of this Decision.

(34) According to its permit, the facility is authorised to recycle a maximum 85 000 LDT per year

(35) This date of expiry is set by reference to a period of validity corresponding to five years from the date of entry into force of this Decision.

(36) According to the information submitted, the theoretical maximum annual ship recycling capacity of the facility is 40 000 LDT per year

(37) According to its permit, the facility is authorised to recycle a maximum of 300 000 LDT per year.

(38) As referred to in Article 7(3) of Regulation (EU) No 1257/2013.

(39) As referred to in Article 32(1), point (a), third sentence, of Regulation (EU) No 1257/2013.

(40) The inclusion of a ship recycling facility located in a third country in the European List is valid for a period of five years from the date of entry into force of the relevant Commission Implementing Decision which provides for the inclusion of that facility, unless otherwise stated.

(41) The theoretical maximum annual ship recycling capacity of the facility is 120 000 LDT per year.

(42) The theoretical maximum annual ship recycling capacity of the facility is 60 000 LDT per year.

(43) The theoretical maximum annual ship recycling capacity of the facility is 75 000 LDT per year.

(44) The theoretical maximum annual ship recycling capacity of the facility is 75 000 LDT per year.

(45) The theoretical maximum annual ship recycling capacity of the facility is 70 000 LDT per year.

(46) The theoretical maximum annual ship recycling capacity of the facility is 80 000 LDT per year.

(47) The theoretical maximum annual ship recycling capacity of the facility is 70 000 LDT per year.

(48) The theoretical maximum annual ship recycling capacity of the facility is 30 000 LDT per year.

(49) The theoretical maximum annual ship recycling capacity of the facility is 90 000 LDT per year.

(50) The theoretical maximum annual ship recycling capacity of the facility is 150 000 LDT per year.

(51) The theoretical maximum annual ship recycling capacity of the facility is 70 000 LDT per year.

(52) According to its permit, the facility is authorised to recycle a maximum of 7 275 LDT per year.

(53) According to its permit, the facility is authorised to recycle a maximum of 38 148 LDT per year.

(54) The theoretical maximum annual ship recycling capacity of the facility is 120 000 LDT per year.

Council Decision of 27 May 2025 amending Decision 1999/70/EC concerning the external auditors of the national central banks, as regards the external auditors of Latvijas Banka

Official Journalof the European Union ENC series
C/2025/3212 6.6.2025
(1) The accounts of the European Central Bank (ECB) and of the national central banks of the Member States whose currency is the euro are to be audited by independent external auditors recommended by the Governing Council of the ECB and approved by the Council of the European Union.
(2) The mandate of the external auditors of Latvijas Banka, SIA Ernst & Young Baltic, ended following the audit for the financial year 2024. It is therefore necessary to appoint external auditors from the financial year 2025 onwards.
(3) Latvijas Banka has selected KPMG Baltics SIA as its external auditors for the financial years 2025 to 2029.
(4) The Governing Council of the ECB has recommended that KPMG Baltics SIA be appointed as the external auditors of Latvijas Banka for the financial years 2025 to 2029.
(5) Following the recommendation of the Governing Council of the ECB, Council Decision 1999/70/EC(2)should be amended accordingly,
THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,
Having regard to Protocol No 4 on the Statute of the European System of Central Banks and of the European Central Bank, annexed to the Treaty on European Union and the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular Article 27.1 thereof,
Having regard to the Recommendation of the European Central Bank of 4 April 2025 to the Council of the European Union on the external auditors of Latvijas Banka (ECB/2025/12)(1),
(1) The accounts of the European Central Bank (ECB) and of the national central banks of the Member States whose currency is the euro are to be audited by independent external auditors recommended by the Governing Council of the ECB and approved by the Council of the European Union.
(2) The mandate of the external auditors of Latvijas Banka, SIA Ernst & Young Baltic, ended following the audit for the financial year 2024. It is therefore necessary to appoint external auditors from the financial year 2025 onwards.
(3) Latvijas Banka has selected KPMG Baltics SIA as its external auditors for the financial years 2025 to 2029.
(4) The Governing Council of the ECB has recommended that KPMG Baltics SIA be appointed as the external auditors of Latvijas Banka for the financial years 2025 to 2029.
(5) Following the recommendation of the Governing Council of the ECB, Council Decision 1999/70/EC(2)should be amended accordingly,
HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:

Article 1
In Article 1 of Decision 1999/70/EC, paragraph 18 is replaced by the following:
‘18. KPMG Baltics SIA are hereby approved as the external auditors of Latvijas Banka for the financial years 2025 to 2029.’.

Article 2
This Decision shall take effect on the date of its notification.

Article 3
This Decision is addressed to the European Central Bank.

THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,
Having regard to Protocol No 4 on the Statute of the European System of Central Banks and of the European Central Bank, annexed to the Treaty on European Union and the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular Article 27.1 thereof,
Having regard to the Recommendation of the European Central Bank of 4 April 2025 to the Council of the European Union on the external auditors of Latvijas Banka (ECB/2025/12)(1),
(1) The accounts of the European Central Bank (ECB) and of the national central banks of the Member States whose currency is the euro are to be audited by independent external auditors recommended by the Governing Council of the ECB and approved by the Council of the European Union.
(2) The mandate of the external auditors of Latvijas Banka, SIA Ernst & Young Baltic, ended following the audit for the financial year 2024. It is therefore necessary to appoint external auditors from the financial year 2025 onwards.
(3) Latvijas Banka has selected KPMG Baltics SIA as its external auditors for the financial years 2025 to 2029.
(4) The Governing Council of the ECB has recommended that KPMG Baltics SIA be appointed as the external auditors of Latvijas Banka for the financial years 2025 to 2029.
(5) Following the recommendation of the Governing Council of the ECB, Council Decision 1999/70/EC(2)should be amended accordingly,
HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
In Article 1 of Decision 1999/70/EC, paragraph 18 is replaced by the following:
‘18. KPMG Baltics SIA are hereby approved as the external auditors of Latvijas Banka for the financial years 2025 to 2029.’.
This Decision shall take effect on the date of its notification.
This Decision is addressed to the European Central Bank.

Council Decision of 27 May 2025 amending Decision 1999/70/EC concerning the external auditors of the national central banks, as regards the external auditors of Lietuvos bankas

Official Journalof the European Union ENC series
C/2025/3210 6.6.2025
(1) The accounts of the European Central Bank (ECB) and of the national central banks of the Member States whose currency is the euro are to be audited by independent external auditors recommended by the Governing Council of the ECB and approved by the Council of the European Union.
(2) The mandate of the external auditors of Lietuvos bankas, UAB ROSK Consulting, ended following the audit for the financial year 2024. It is therefore necessary to appoint external auditors from the financial year 2025 onwards.
(3) Lietuvos bankas has selected UAB ROSK Consulting as its external auditors for the financial years 2025 to 2027.
(4) The Governing Council of the ECB has recommended that UAB ROSK Consulting be appointed as the external auditors of Lietuvos bankas for the financial years 2025 to 2027.
(5) Following the recommendation of the Governing Council of the ECB, Council Decision 1999/70/EC(2)should be amended accordingly,
THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,
Having regard to Protocol No 4 on the Statute of the European System of Central Banks and of the European Central Bank, annexed to the Treaty on European Union and the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular Article 27.1 thereof,
Having regard to the Recommendation of the European Central Bank of 4 April 2025 to the Council of the European Union on the external auditors of Lietuvos bankas (ECB/2025/11)(1),
(1) The accounts of the European Central Bank (ECB) and of the national central banks of the Member States whose currency is the euro are to be audited by independent external auditors recommended by the Governing Council of the ECB and approved by the Council of the European Union.
(2) The mandate of the external auditors of Lietuvos bankas, UAB ROSK Consulting, ended following the audit for the financial year 2024. It is therefore necessary to appoint external auditors from the financial year 2025 onwards.
(3) Lietuvos bankas has selected UAB ROSK Consulting as its external auditors for the financial years 2025 to 2027.
(4) The Governing Council of the ECB has recommended that UAB ROSK Consulting be appointed as the external auditors of Lietuvos bankas for the financial years 2025 to 2027.
(5) Following the recommendation of the Governing Council of the ECB, Council Decision 1999/70/EC(2)should be amended accordingly,
HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:

Article 1
In Article 1 of Decision 1999/70/EC, paragraph 19 is replaced by the following:
‘19. UAB ROSK Consulting are hereby approved as the external auditors of Lietuvos bankas for the financial years 2025 to 2027.’.

Article 2
This Decision shall take effect on the date of its notification.

Article 3
This Decision is addressed to the European Central Bank.

THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,
Having regard to Protocol No 4 on the Statute of the European System of Central Banks and of the European Central Bank, annexed to the Treaty on European Union and the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular Article 27.1 thereof,
Having regard to the Recommendation of the European Central Bank of 4 April 2025 to the Council of the European Union on the external auditors of Lietuvos bankas (ECB/2025/11)(1),
(1) The accounts of the European Central Bank (ECB) and of the national central banks of the Member States whose currency is the euro are to be audited by independent external auditors recommended by the Governing Council of the ECB and approved by the Council of the European Union.
(2) The mandate of the external auditors of Lietuvos bankas, UAB ROSK Consulting, ended following the audit for the financial year 2024. It is therefore necessary to appoint external auditors from the financial year 2025 onwards.
(3) Lietuvos bankas has selected UAB ROSK Consulting as its external auditors for the financial years 2025 to 2027.
(4) The Governing Council of the ECB has recommended that UAB ROSK Consulting be appointed as the external auditors of Lietuvos bankas for the financial years 2025 to 2027.
(5) Following the recommendation of the Governing Council of the ECB, Council Decision 1999/70/EC(2)should be amended accordingly,
HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
In Article 1 of Decision 1999/70/EC, paragraph 19 is replaced by the following:
‘19. UAB ROSK Consulting are hereby approved as the external auditors of Lietuvos bankas for the financial years 2025 to 2027.’.
This Decision shall take effect on the date of its notification.
This Decision is addressed to the European Central Bank.

Commission Implementing Decision (EU) 2025/321 of 11 February 2025 amending the Annex to Implementing Decision (EU) 2023/2447 concerning emergency measures in relation to outbreaks of highly pathogenic avian influenza in certain Member States (notified under document C(2025) 1013)

Official Journalof the European Union ENL series
2025/321 14.2.2025
(1) Highly pathogenic avian influenza (HPAI) is an infectious viral disease in birds and can have a severe impact on the profitability of poultry farming causing disturbance to trade within the Union and exports to third countries. HPAI viruses can infect migratory birds, which can then spread these viruses over long distances during their autumn and spring migrations. Therefore, the presence of HPAI viruses in wild birds poses a continuous threat for the direct and indirect introduction of these viruses into holdings where poultry or captive birds are kept. In the event of an outbreak of HPAI, there is a risk that the disease agent may spread to other holdings where poultry or captive birds are kept.
(2) Regulation (EU) 2016/429 establishes the legislative framework for the prevention and control of diseases that are transmissible to animals or humans. HPAI falls within the definition of a listed disease in that Regulation, and it is subject to the disease prevention and control rules laid down therein. In addition, Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2020/687(2)supplements Regulation (EU) 2016/429 as regards the rules for the prevention and control of certain listed diseases, including disease control measures for HPAI.
(3) On 24 October 2023, the Commission adopted Commission Implementing Decision (EU) 2023/2447(3)on the basis of Regulation (EU) 2016/429 which lays down emergency measures at Union level in relation to outbreaks of HPAI.
(4) In particular, Implementing Decision (EU) 2023/2447 provides that the protection, surveillance and further restricted zones, to be established by the concerned Member States following outbreaks of HPAI, in accordance with Delegated Regulation (EU) 2020/687, must comprise at least the areas listed as protection, surveillance and further restricted zones in the Annex to that Implementing Decision.
(5) The Annex to Implementing Decision (EU) 2023/2447 was recently amended by Commission Implementing Decision (EU) 2025/270(4)following further outbreaks of HPAI in Germany, Italy, Lithuania, Hungary, Poland and Portugal in establishments where poultry or captive birds were kept, which needed to be reflected in that Annex.
(6) Since the date of adoption of Implementing Decision (EU) 2025/270, Belgium, Bulgaria, Germany, Italy, Hungary, the Netherlands, Poland and Portugal have notified the Commission of further outbreaks of HPAI, in establishments where poultry or captive birds were kept, located in the province of Liege in Belgium, in the district of Plovdiv in Bulgaria, in the Lower Saxony state in Germany, in the Piemonte region in Italy, in the Hajdú-Bihar county in Hungary, in the province of Friesland in the Netherlands, in the Łódzkie, Lubuskie, Mazowieckie and Wielkopolskie voivodeships in Poland and in the Aveiro district in Portugal.
(7) Belgium, Bulgaria, Germany, Italy, Hungary, the Netherlands, Poland and Portugal have taken the disease control measures required in accordance with Delegated Regulation (EU) 2020/687, including the establishment of protection and surveillance zones around the outbreaks.
(8) The Commission has examined the disease control measures taken by Belgium, Bulgaria, Germany, Italy, Hungary, the Netherlands, Poland and Portugal and it is satisfied that the boundaries of the protection and surveillances zones established by those Member States are at a sufficient distance from the establishments where outbreaks of HPAI have been confirmed.
(9) In the Annex to Implementing Decision (EU) 2023/2447, there are currently no areas listed as protection and surveillance zones for Belgium and Bulgaria, and there are no areas listed as a protection zone for the Netherlands.
(10) In order to prevent any unnecessary disturbance to trade within the Union and to avoid unjustified barriers to trade being imposed by third countries, it is necessary to rapidly lay down at Union level, in collaboration with Belgium, Bulgaria, Germany, Italy, Hungary, the Netherlands, Poland and Portugal, the protection and surveillance zones established by those Member States, in accordance with Delegated Regulation (EU) 2020/687.
(11) Therefore, the areas listed as protection and surveillance zones for Germany, Italy, Hungary, Poland and Portugal, and the surveillance zone for the Netherlands in the Annex to Implementing Decision (EU) 2023/2447 should be updated.
(12) In addition, the protection and surveillance zones for Belgium and Bulgaria and the protection zone for the Netherlands should be listed in the Annex to Implementing Decision (EU) 2023/2447.
(13) Accordingly, the Annex to Implementing Decision (EU) 2023/2447 should be amended to update the regionalisation at Union level and to take account of the protection and surveillance zones established by Belgium, Bulgaria, Germany, Italy, Hungary, the Netherlands, Poland and Portugal, in accordance with Delegated Regulation (EU) 2020/687, as well as to set out the duration of the measures applicable therein.
(14) Implementing Decision (EU) 2023/2447 should therefore be amended accordingly.
(15) Given the urgency of the epidemiological situation in the Union as regards the spread of HPAI, it is important that the amendments to be made to Implementing Decision (EU) 2023/2447 by this Decision take effect as soon as possible.
(16) The measures provided for in this Decision are in accordance with the opinion of the Standing Committee on Plants, Animals, Food and Feed,
ADIS reference number of the outbreak Area comprising: Date until applicable in accordance with Article 39 of Delegated Regulation (EU) 2020/687
Province: Liege
BE-HPAI(NON-P)-2025-00003 Those parts of the municipalities Beyne-Heusay, Blegny, Herstal, Luik, Oupeye, Soumagne and Wezet contained within a circle of a radius of 3 kilometres, centered on WGS84 dec. coordinates long 5,652532, lat 50,659096. 20.2.2025
ADIS reference number of the outbreak Area comprising: Date until applicable in accordance with Article 39 of Delegated Regulation (EU) 2020/687
Plovdiv region
BG-HPAI(P)-2025-00001 The following villages in Asenovgrad municipality—Asenovgrad—BoyantsiThe following villages in Sadovo municipality—Mominsko — Asenovgrad — Boyantsi — Mominsko 14.3.2025
— Asenovgrad
— Boyantsi
— Mominsko
— Asenovgrad
— Boyantsi
— Mominsko
ADIS reference number of the outbreak Area comprising: Date until applicable in accordance with Article 39 of Delegated Regulation (EU) 2020/687
NIEDERSACHSEN
DE-HPAI(P)-2025-00003 Landkreis Grafschaft Bentheim3 km Radius um den Ausbruchsbetrieb mit den GPS-Koordinaten 6.979736, 52.585098.Betroffen sind Teile der Gemeinden Hoogstede, Osterwald und Ringe 15.2.2025
DE-HPAI(P)-2025-00004 Landkreis Aurich3 km Radius um den Ausbruchsbetrieb mit den GPS-Koordinaten 7.612823, 53.484455.Betroffen sind Teile der Gemeinde Großefehn und der Stadt Aurich. 27.2.2025
DE-HPAI(P)-2025-00005 Landkreis Friesland3 km Radius um den Ausbruchsbetrieb mit den GPS-Koordinaten 7.897797, 53.702855.Betroffen sind Teile der Gemeinde Wangerland. 27.2.2025
ADIS reference number of the outbreak Area comprising: Date until applicable in accordance with Article 39 of Delegated Regulation (EU) 2020/687
Veneto region:
IT-HPAI(P)-2025-00015 The area of the parts of Veneto Region contained within a circle of radius of three kilometres, centred on WGS84 dec. coordinates N 45.387097, E 10.845679 7.2.2025
IT-HPAI(P)-2025-00016 The area of the parts of Veneto Region contained within a circle of radius of three kilometres, centred on WGS84 dec. coordinates N 45.328305525, E 10.962802707 7.2.2025
IT-HPAI(P)-2025- 00018 The area of the parts of Veneto Region contained within a circle of radius of three kilometres, centred on WGS84 dec. coordinates N 45.307002212, E 10.924128439 27.2.2025
IT-HPAI(P)-2025- 00019 The area of the parts of Veneto Region contained within a circle of radius of three kilometres, centred on WGS84 dec. coordinates N 45.313221094, E 11.032151414 20.2.2025
IT-HPAI(P)-2025- 00020 The area of the parts of Veneto Region contained within a circle of radius of three kilometres, centred on WGS84 dec. coordinates N 45.416369117, E 10.788320732 24.2.2025
Lombardia region:
IT-HPAI(P)-2025-00001 The area of the parts of Lombardia Region contained within a circle of radius of three kilometres, centred on WGS84 dec. coordinates N 45.297148, E 10.761502 7.2.2025
IT-HPAI(P)-2025-00002 The area of the parts of Lombardia Region contained within a circle of radius of three kilometres, centred on WGS84 dec. coordinates N 45.312173, E 10.785147 12.2.2025
IT-HPAI(P)-2025-00003 The area of the parts of Lombardia Region contained within a circle of radius of three kilometres, centred on WGS84 dec. coordinates N 45.289988, E 10.765221 11.2.2025
IT-HPAI(P)-2025-00004 The area of the parts of Lombardia Region contained within a circle of radius of three kilometres, centred on WGS84 dec. coordinates N 45.289456, E 10.758892 11.2.2025
IT-HPAI(P)-2025-00009 The area of the parts of Lombardia Region contained within a circle of radius of three kilometres, centred on WGS84 dec. coordinates N 45.295545, E 10.762689 13.2.2025
IT-HPAI(P)-2025-00010 The area of the parts of Lombardia Region contained within a circle of radius of three kilometres, centred on WGS84 dec. coordinates N 45.28669, E 10.780547 14.2.2025
IT-HPAI(P)-2025-00011 The area of the parts of Lombardia Region contained within a circle of radius of three kilometres, centred on WGS84 dec. coordinates N 45.2787, E 10.800989 7.2.2025
IT-HPAI(P)-2025-00017 The area of the parts of Lombardia Region contained within a circle of radius of three kilometres, centred on WGS84 dec. coordinates N 45.306725, E 10.794453 13.2.2025
Piemonte region:
IT-HPAI(P)-2025-00021 The area of the parts of Piemonte Region contained within a circle of radius of three kilometres, centred on WGS84 dec. coordinates N 45.184691, E 7.95224999 5.3.2025
ADIS reference number of the outbreak Area comprising: Date until applicable in accordance with Article 39 of Delegated Regulation (EU) 2020/687
LT-HPAI(P)-2025-00001 Klaipeda district municipality Priekule parish Lankupiai village, Liaunai village, Grumbliai village, Silininkai village.Silutes district municipality Saugu parish Pangiriai village, Sakuteliai village, Grumbliai village., Silininkai village, Ciuteliai village, Mantvydai village, Bundalai village, Stankaiciai village, Vilkmedziai village, Begedziai village, Kabeliai village, Lankupiai village, Vilkyciai village 28.2.2025
ADIS reference number of the outbreak Area comprising: Date until applicable in accordance with Article 39 of Delegated Regulation (EU) 2020/687
Szabolcs-Szatmár-Bereg vármegye
HU-HPAI(P)-2025-00003 Balkány település közigazgatási területének a 47.684926 és a 21.866182 GPS-koordináták által meghatározott pont körüli 3 km sugarú körön belül eső területe. 9.2.2025
Hajdú-Bihar vármegye
HU-HPAI(P)-2025-00003 Nyíradony település közigazgatási területének a 47.684926 és a 21.866182 GPS-koordináták által meghatározott pont körüli 3 km sugarú körön belül eső területe. 9.2.2025
HU-HPAI(P)-2025-00004HU-HPAI(P)-2025-00007 Báránd, Bihardancsháza, Földes, Kaba, Nagyrábé, Sáp és SápTetétlen települések közigazgatási területének a 47.255532, 21.321795, valamint a 47.288012 és a 21.284262 GPS-koordináták által meghatározott pont körüli 3 km sugarú körön belül eső területe. 9.3.2025
Heves vármegye
HU-HPAI(P)-2025-00005 Átány, Heves települések közigazgatási területének a 47.623310 és a 20.285607 GPS-koordináták által meghatározott pont körüli 3 km sugarú körön belül eső területe. 22.2.2025
Pest vármegye
HU-HPAI(P)-2025-00006 Bag, Domony, Gödöllő és Veresegyház közigazgatási területének a 47.621000 és a 19.383500 GPS-koordináták által meghatározott pont körüli 3 km sugarú körön belül eső területe. 23.2.2025
ADIS reference number of the outbreak Area comprising: Date until applicable in accordance with Article 39 of Delegated Regulation (EU) 2020/687
Municipality Súdwest Fryslan Province Friesland
NL-HPAI(P)-2025-00005 Those parts of the the Municipality Súdwest Fryslan in the province Friesland contained within a circle of a radius of 3 kilometres, centered on WGS84 dec. coordinates long 5.431 / lat 53.049 21.2.2025
ADIS reference number of the outbreak Area comprising: Date until applicable in accordance with Article 39 of Delegated Regulation (EU) 2020/687
PL-HPAI(P)-2025-00002PL-HPAI(P)-2025-00007PL-HPAI(P)-2025-00015 W województwie mazowieckim:powiat żuromiński:a)w gminie Bieżuń, miejscowości: Bielawy Gołuskie, Dąbrówki na wschód od drogi krajowej 561 oraz na północ od odnogi rzeki Wkra, Dźwierzno, Gołuszyn na południowy zachód od rzeki Dopływ spod Stawiszyna, Karniszyn, Karniszyn-Parcele, Kobyla Łąka, Kocewo, Myślin, Sadłowo, Sadłowo-Parcele, Stawiszyn-Łaziska, Sławęcin na zachód od rzeki Dopływ spod Stawiszyna oraz miasto Bieżuń z wyjątkiem części miejscowości ograniczonej drogą krajową nr 541, ulicą Lawendową oraz ulicą Płocką, Strzeszewo;b)w gminie Żuromin, miejscowości: Chamsk z wyjątkiem części miejscowości ograniczonej na zachód drogą krajową nr 541, na południe ul. Wyzwolenia oraz na wschód ulicą Mazowiecką aż do granicy miejscowości, Franciszkowo za wyjątkiem części miejscowości na północ od ul. Ponad Lasem, Młudzyn. a) w gminie Bieżuń, miejscowości: Bielawy Gołuskie, Dąbrówki na wschód od drogi krajowej 561 oraz na północ od odnogi rzeki Wkra, Dźwierzno, Gołuszyn na południowy zachód od rzeki Dopływ spod Stawiszyna, Karniszyn, Karniszyn-Parcele, Kobyla Łąka, Kocewo, Myślin, Sadłowo, Sadłowo-Parcele, Stawiszyn-Łaziska, Sławęcin na zachód od rzeki Dopływ spod Stawiszyna oraz miasto Bieżuń z wyjątkiem części miejscowości ograniczonej drogą krajową nr 541, ulicą Lawendową oraz ulicą Płocką, Strzeszewo; b) w gminie Żuromin, miejscowości: Chamsk z wyjątkiem części miejscowości ograniczonej na zachód drogą krajową nr 541, na południe ul. Wyzwolenia oraz na wschód ulicą Mazowiecką aż do granicy miejscowości, Franciszkowo za wyjątkiem części miejscowości na północ od ul. Ponad Lasem, Młudzyn. 25.2.2025
a) w gminie Bieżuń, miejscowości: Bielawy Gołuskie, Dąbrówki na wschód od drogi krajowej 561 oraz na północ od odnogi rzeki Wkra, Dźwierzno, Gołuszyn na południowy zachód od rzeki Dopływ spod Stawiszyna, Karniszyn, Karniszyn-Parcele, Kobyla Łąka, Kocewo, Myślin, Sadłowo, Sadłowo-Parcele, Stawiszyn-Łaziska, Sławęcin na zachód od rzeki Dopływ spod Stawiszyna oraz miasto Bieżuń z wyjątkiem części miejscowości ograniczonej drogą krajową nr 541, ulicą Lawendową oraz ulicą Płocką, Strzeszewo;
b) w gminie Żuromin, miejscowości: Chamsk z wyjątkiem części miejscowości ograniczonej na zachód drogą krajową nr 541, na południe ul. Wyzwolenia oraz na wschód ulicą Mazowiecką aż do granicy miejscowości, Franciszkowo za wyjątkiem części miejscowości na północ od ul. Ponad Lasem, Młudzyn.
PL-HPAI(NON-P)-2025-00004 W województwie podkarpackim, w powiecie jarosławskim:1)Surochów, Koniaczów, Munina, Sobiecin, Tuczempy, Zgoda w gminiewiejskiej Jarosław;2)Wietlin w gminie Laszki;3)Ostrów w gminie Radymno. 1) Surochów, Koniaczów, Munina, Sobiecin, Tuczempy, Zgoda w gminie 2) Wietlin w gminie Laszki; 3) Ostrów w gminie Radymno. 11.2.2025
1) Surochów, Koniaczów, Munina, Sobiecin, Tuczempy, Zgoda w gminie
2) Wietlin w gminie Laszki;
3) Ostrów w gminie Radymno.
PL-HPAI(P)-2025-00003 W województwie warmińsko-mazurskim:3.powiat giżycki:a.gmina Giżycko: Sterławki Małe, Sterławki Średnie, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Bogacko na południe od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Kronowo i Wrony, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Wrony na zachód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Kamionki i Jagodne Małe;b.gmina Ryn: Sterławki Wielkie, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Jeziorko na północ od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Orło i Szczybały Giżyckie, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Kronowo na południe od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Bałowo i Kamionki. 3. powiat giżycki:a.gmina Giżycko: Sterławki Małe, Sterławki Średnie, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Bogacko na południe od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Kronowo i Wrony, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Wrony na zachód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Kamionki i Jagodne Małe;b.gmina Ryn: Sterławki Wielkie, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Jeziorko na północ od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Orło i Szczybały Giżyckie, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Kronowo na południe od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Bałowo i Kamionki. a. gmina Giżycko: Sterławki Małe, Sterławki Średnie, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Bogacko na południe od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Kronowo i Wrony, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Wrony na zachód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Kamionki i Jagodne Małe; b. gmina Ryn: Sterławki Wielkie, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Jeziorko na północ od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Orło i Szczybały Giżyckie, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Kronowo na południe od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Bałowo i Kamionki. 16.2.2025
3. powiat giżycki:a.gmina Giżycko: Sterławki Małe, Sterławki Średnie, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Bogacko na południe od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Kronowo i Wrony, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Wrony na zachód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Kamionki i Jagodne Małe;b.gmina Ryn: Sterławki Wielkie, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Jeziorko na północ od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Orło i Szczybały Giżyckie, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Kronowo na południe od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Bałowo i Kamionki. a. gmina Giżycko: Sterławki Małe, Sterławki Średnie, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Bogacko na południe od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Kronowo i Wrony, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Wrony na zachód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Kamionki i Jagodne Małe; b. gmina Ryn: Sterławki Wielkie, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Jeziorko na północ od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Orło i Szczybały Giżyckie, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Kronowo na południe od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Bałowo i Kamionki.
a. gmina Giżycko: Sterławki Małe, Sterławki Średnie, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Bogacko na południe od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Kronowo i Wrony, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Wrony na zachód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Kamionki i Jagodne Małe;
b. gmina Ryn: Sterławki Wielkie, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Jeziorko na północ od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Orło i Szczybały Giżyckie, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Kronowo na południe od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Bałowo i Kamionki.
PL-HPAI(P)-2025-00004 Obszar zapowietrzony w województwie zachodniopomorskim:1.Część gminy Osina w powiecie goleniowskim,2.Część gminy Nowogard w powiecie goleniowskim3.Część gminy Maszewo w powiecie goleniowskimZawierający się w promieniu 3 km od współrzędnych 53.58037 15.06903 1. Część gminy Osina w powiecie goleniowskim, 2. Część gminy Nowogard w powiecie goleniowskim 3. Część gminy Maszewo w powiecie goleniowskim 17.2.2025
1. Część gminy Osina w powiecie goleniowskim,
2. Część gminy Nowogard w powiecie goleniowskim
3. Część gminy Maszewo w powiecie goleniowskim
PL-HPAI(P)-2025-00005 —woj łódzkie:—powiat kutnowski, gmina Kutno: Gołębiewek Nowy, Gołębiewek Stary, Krzesin, Wroczyny, Ryków, Krzesin – Parcela, Krzesinówek, Adamów, Adamowice od ul. Krośniewickiej 33 w kierunku miejscowości Skłóty, Podczachy, Franki Wroczyńskie;—powiat kutnowski, gmina Nowe Ostrowy: Grochów, Wołodrza, Grochówek, Kały – Towarzystwo, Perna;—powiat kutnowski, gmina Krośniewice: Nowe, Skłóty, Szubina, Szubsk Duży, Witów, Szubsk – Towarzystwo, Cygany, Pomarzany od nr 36 w kierunku miejscowości Szubina, Pawlikowice od nr 22 w kierunku miejscowości Nowe, Iwiczna od nr 29 w kierunku miejscowości Skłótyzawierające się w promieniu 3 km od współrzędnych GPS: 52.2460533453/19.2526209874 — woj łódzkie: — powiat kutnowski, gmina Kutno: Gołębiewek Nowy, Gołębiewek Stary, Krzesin, Wroczyny, Ryków, Krzesin – Parcela, Krzesinówek, Adamów, Adamowice od ul. Krośniewickiej 33 w kierunku miejscowości Skłóty, Podczachy, Franki Wroczyńskie; — powiat kutnowski, gmina Nowe Ostrowy: Grochów, Wołodrza, Grochówek, Kały – Towarzystwo, Perna; — powiat kutnowski, gmina Krośniewice: Nowe, Skłóty, Szubina, Szubsk Duży, Witów, Szubsk – Towarzystwo, Cygany, Pomarzany od nr 36 w kierunku miejscowości Szubina, Pawlikowice od nr 22 w kierunku miejscowości Nowe, Iwiczna od nr 29 w kierunku miejscowości Skłóty 17.2.2025
— woj łódzkie:
— powiat kutnowski, gmina Kutno: Gołębiewek Nowy, Gołębiewek Stary, Krzesin, Wroczyny, Ryków, Krzesin – Parcela, Krzesinówek, Adamów, Adamowice od ul. Krośniewickiej 33 w kierunku miejscowości Skłóty, Podczachy, Franki Wroczyńskie;
— powiat kutnowski, gmina Nowe Ostrowy: Grochów, Wołodrza, Grochówek, Kały – Towarzystwo, Perna;
— powiat kutnowski, gmina Krośniewice: Nowe, Skłóty, Szubina, Szubsk Duży, Witów, Szubsk – Towarzystwo, Cygany, Pomarzany od nr 36 w kierunku miejscowości Szubina, Pawlikowice od nr 22 w kierunku miejscowości Nowe, Iwiczna od nr 29 w kierunku miejscowości Skłóty
PL-HPAI(P)-2025-00006 W województwie warmińsko-mazurskim:1.powiat iławski:a.gmina Kisielice: Byliny, Goryń, Kantowo, Krzywka, Wałdowo, w granicach administracyjnych miasta Kisielice na południe od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Limża i Wola, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Limża na południe od drogi krajowej nr 16, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Łodygowo na południe od drogi krajowej nr 16, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Ogrodzieniec na południe od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Trumieje i Trupel, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Sobiewola na południe od drogi krajowej nr 16. 1. powiat iławski:a.gmina Kisielice: Byliny, Goryń, Kantowo, Krzywka, Wałdowo, w granicach administracyjnych miasta Kisielice na południe od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Limża i Wola, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Limża na południe od drogi krajowej nr 16, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Łodygowo na południe od drogi krajowej nr 16, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Ogrodzieniec na południe od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Trumieje i Trupel, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Sobiewola na południe od drogi krajowej nr 16. a. gmina Kisielice: Byliny, Goryń, Kantowo, Krzywka, Wałdowo, w granicach administracyjnych miasta Kisielice na południe od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Limża i Wola, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Limża na południe od drogi krajowej nr 16, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Łodygowo na południe od drogi krajowej nr 16, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Ogrodzieniec na południe od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Trumieje i Trupel, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Sobiewola na południe od drogi krajowej nr 16. 16.2.2025
1. powiat iławski:a.gmina Kisielice: Byliny, Goryń, Kantowo, Krzywka, Wałdowo, w granicach administracyjnych miasta Kisielice na południe od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Limża i Wola, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Limża na południe od drogi krajowej nr 16, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Łodygowo na południe od drogi krajowej nr 16, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Ogrodzieniec na południe od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Trumieje i Trupel, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Sobiewola na południe od drogi krajowej nr 16. a. gmina Kisielice: Byliny, Goryń, Kantowo, Krzywka, Wałdowo, w granicach administracyjnych miasta Kisielice na południe od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Limża i Wola, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Limża na południe od drogi krajowej nr 16, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Łodygowo na południe od drogi krajowej nr 16, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Ogrodzieniec na południe od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Trumieje i Trupel, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Sobiewola na południe od drogi krajowej nr 16.
a. gmina Kisielice: Byliny, Goryń, Kantowo, Krzywka, Wałdowo, w granicach administracyjnych miasta Kisielice na południe od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Limża i Wola, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Limża na południe od drogi krajowej nr 16, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Łodygowo na południe od drogi krajowej nr 16, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Ogrodzieniec na południe od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Trumieje i Trupel, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Sobiewola na południe od drogi krajowej nr 16.
PL-HPAI(P)-2025-00008 W województwie warmińsko-mazurskim:1.powiat giżycki:a.gmina Giżycko: Antonowo, Gajewo, Świdry, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Spytkowo na zachód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Świdry i Kożuchy Wielkie;b.miasto Giżycko. 1. powiat giżycki:a.gmina Giżycko: Antonowo, Gajewo, Świdry, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Spytkowo na zachód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Świdry i Kożuchy Wielkie;b.miasto Giżycko. a. gmina Giżycko: Antonowo, Gajewo, Świdry, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Spytkowo na zachód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Świdry i Kożuchy Wielkie; b. miasto Giżycko. 17.2.2025
1. powiat giżycki:a.gmina Giżycko: Antonowo, Gajewo, Świdry, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Spytkowo na zachód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Świdry i Kożuchy Wielkie;b.miasto Giżycko. a. gmina Giżycko: Antonowo, Gajewo, Świdry, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Spytkowo na zachód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Świdry i Kożuchy Wielkie; b. miasto Giżycko.
a. gmina Giżycko: Antonowo, Gajewo, Świdry, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Spytkowo na zachód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Świdry i Kożuchy Wielkie;
b. miasto Giżycko.
PL-HPAI(P)-2025-00009 W województwie podkarpackim:1)Ostrów, Kozodrza, Skrzyszów, Ocieka, Zdżary w gminie Ostrów, powiat ropczycko-sędziszowski;2)Ropczyce – osiedle Pietrzejowa w gminie Ropczyce, powiat ropczycko-sędziszowski;3)Kochanówka w gminie Dębica, powiat dębicki. 1) Ostrów, Kozodrza, Skrzyszów, Ocieka, Zdżary w gminie Ostrów, powiat ropczycko-sędziszowski; 2) Ropczyce – osiedle Pietrzejowa w gminie Ropczyce, powiat ropczycko-sędziszowski; 3) Kochanówka w gminie Dębica, powiat dębicki. 22.2.2025
1) Ostrów, Kozodrza, Skrzyszów, Ocieka, Zdżary w gminie Ostrów, powiat ropczycko-sędziszowski;
2) Ropczyce – osiedle Pietrzejowa w gminie Ropczyce, powiat ropczycko-sędziszowski;
3) Kochanówka w gminie Dębica, powiat dębicki.
PL-HPAI(P)-2025-00010 —woj łódzkie:—powiat zgierski;gmina Ozorków: Boczki, Skotniki, Małachowice, Małachowice-Kolonia, Sokolniki-Parcela, Sokolniki, Maszkowice, Helenów, Ozorków na północ ulicami Maszkowska (przy granicy z miejscowością Helenów), następnie na zachód wzdłuż ulicy Granicznej do koryta rzeki Bzura dalej wzdłuż ul. Kochanowskiego do ul. Wodnej dalej ulicami: Adamówek, Sikorskiego, Działkowa, Słoneczna, Konopnickiej, Zielona od nr 15a w kierunku zachodnim do ul. Żytniej, na północ wzdłuż ul. Żytniej (w kierunku granicy z miejscowością Śliwniki) wzdłuż koryta rzeki Solanka, Wróblew, Parzyce, Muchówka, Tymienica, Ostrów, Dybówka, Cedrowice, Cedrowice-Parcela, Czerchów, Opalanki.zawierające się w promieniu 3 km od współrzędnych GPS: 51.98213/19.29961 — woj łódzkie: — powiat zgierski; 20.2.2025
— woj łódzkie:
— powiat zgierski;
PL-HPAI(P)-2025-00011 W województwie wielkopolskim w powiecie kolskim:1.w gminie Grzegorzew miejscowości: Barłogi, Boguszyniec, Borysławice Zamkowe, Bylice Kolonia, Bylice Wieś, Grodna, Grzegorzew, Kiełczewek, Ponętów Dolny, Zabłocie;w gminie Koło miejscowości: Kiełczew Górny, Kiełczew Smużny I, Wandynów. 1. w gminie Grzegorzew miejscowości: Barłogi, Boguszyniec, Borysławice Zamkowe, Bylice Kolonia, Bylice Wieś, Grodna, Grzegorzew, Kiełczewek, Ponętów Dolny, Zabłocie; 22.2.2025
1. w gminie Grzegorzew miejscowości: Barłogi, Boguszyniec, Borysławice Zamkowe, Bylice Kolonia, Bylice Wieś, Grodna, Grzegorzew, Kiełczewek, Ponętów Dolny, Zabłocie;
PL-HPAI(P)-2025-00012 W województwie wielkopolskim:1.w powiecie kępińskim, w gminie Kępno, miejscowości: Mikorzyn, Mechnice, Domanin, Myjomice, Kierzenko, Ostrówiec, Kierzno, Pustkowie Kierzeńskie;2.w powiecie ostrzeszowskim, w gminie Doruchów, miejscowość: Rudniczysko.W województwie łódzkim, w powiecie wieruszowskim, w gminie Wieruszów miejscowość Jutrków. 1. w powiecie kępińskim, w gminie Kępno, miejscowości: Mikorzyn, Mechnice, Domanin, Myjomice, Kierzenko, Ostrówiec, Kierzno, Pustkowie Kierzeńskie; 2. w powiecie ostrzeszowskim, w gminie Doruchów, miejscowość: Rudniczysko. 21.2.2025
1. w powiecie kępińskim, w gminie Kępno, miejscowości: Mikorzyn, Mechnice, Domanin, Myjomice, Kierzenko, Ostrówiec, Kierzno, Pustkowie Kierzeńskie;
2. w powiecie ostrzeszowskim, w gminie Doruchów, miejscowość: Rudniczysko.
PL-HPAI(P)-2025-00013PL-HPAI(P)-2025-00017PL-HPAI(P)-2025-00018 W województwie wielkopolskim w powiecie kaliskim:1.powiecie kaliskim, w gminie Opatówek, miejscowości: Dębe-Kolonia, Kobierno, Rożdżały, Tłokinia Kościelna, Tłokinia Mała, Tłokinia Wielka, Słoneczna, Frankowizna, Borów, Zmyślanka;2.w powiecie kaliskim, w gminie Ceków-Kolonia, miejscowości: Beznatka, Kamień, Bystrek, Cierpiatka, Kamień-Kolonia, Korek, Magdalenów;3.w powiecie kaliskim, w gminie Koźminek, miejscowości: Dębsko, Emilianów (wraz z Zosina), Tymianek, Pietrzyków, Smółki, Ksawerów, Marianów, Złotniki, Nowy Karolew, Gać Kaliska, Stary Karolew, Chodybki, Moskurnia, miasto Koźminek (wraz z Przydziałki, Słowiki, Warwarówka), Stary Nakwasin;4.w powiecie kaliskim, w gminie Żelazków miejscowość: Dębe, Florentyna, Ilno, Pólko, Skarszew, Skarszewek;5.w powiecie kaliskim, w gminie Lisków, miejscowość: Trzebienie, Ciepielew.W województwie łódzkim, w powiecie sieradzkim:—w gminie Goszczanów, miejscowości: Sokołów, Sulmów, Wola TłomakowaZawierające się w promieniu 3 km od współrzędnych GPS 51.785304/ 18.407166, 1851.786618815/ 18.40688426 1. powiecie kaliskim, w gminie Opatówek, miejscowości: Dębe-Kolonia, Kobierno, Rożdżały, Tłokinia Kościelna, Tłokinia Mała, Tłokinia Wielka, Słoneczna, Frankowizna, Borów, Zmyślanka; 2. w powiecie kaliskim, w gminie Ceków-Kolonia, miejscowości: Beznatka, Kamień, Bystrek, Cierpiatka, Kamień-Kolonia, Korek, Magdalenów; 3. w powiecie kaliskim, w gminie Koźminek, miejscowości: Dębsko, Emilianów (wraz z Zosina), Tymianek, Pietrzyków, Smółki, Ksawerów, Marianów, Złotniki, Nowy Karolew, Gać Kaliska, Stary Karolew, Chodybki, Moskurnia, miasto Koźminek (wraz z Przydziałki, Słowiki, Warwarówka), Stary Nakwasin; 4. w powiecie kaliskim, w gminie Żelazków miejscowość: Dębe, Florentyna, Ilno, Pólko, Skarszew, Skarszewek; 5. w powiecie kaliskim, w gminie Lisków, miejscowość: Trzebienie, Ciepielew. — w gminie Goszczanów, miejscowości: Sokołów, Sulmów, Wola Tłomakowa 1.3.2025
1. powiecie kaliskim, w gminie Opatówek, miejscowości: Dębe-Kolonia, Kobierno, Rożdżały, Tłokinia Kościelna, Tłokinia Mała, Tłokinia Wielka, Słoneczna, Frankowizna, Borów, Zmyślanka;
2. w powiecie kaliskim, w gminie Ceków-Kolonia, miejscowości: Beznatka, Kamień, Bystrek, Cierpiatka, Kamień-Kolonia, Korek, Magdalenów;
3. w powiecie kaliskim, w gminie Koźminek, miejscowości: Dębsko, Emilianów (wraz z Zosina), Tymianek, Pietrzyków, Smółki, Ksawerów, Marianów, Złotniki, Nowy Karolew, Gać Kaliska, Stary Karolew, Chodybki, Moskurnia, miasto Koźminek (wraz z Przydziałki, Słowiki, Warwarówka), Stary Nakwasin;
4. w powiecie kaliskim, w gminie Żelazków miejscowość: Dębe, Florentyna, Ilno, Pólko, Skarszew, Skarszewek;
5. w powiecie kaliskim, w gminie Lisków, miejscowość: Trzebienie, Ciepielew.
— w gminie Goszczanów, miejscowości: Sokołów, Sulmów, Wola Tłomakowa
PL-HPAI(P)-2025-00014 W województwie lubuskim,1)w powiecie nowosolskim, w gminie Kolsko, miejscowości: Konotop, Lipka2)w powiecie zielonogórskim, w gminie Bojadła, miejscowości: Pyrnik Młynkowo, Kartno, Susłów. 1) w powiecie nowosolskim, w gminie Kolsko, miejscowości: Konotop, Lipka 2) w powiecie zielonogórskim, w gminie Bojadła, miejscowości: Pyrnik Młynkowo, Kartno, Susłów. 26.2.2025
1) w powiecie nowosolskim, w gminie Kolsko, miejscowości: Konotop, Lipka
2) w powiecie zielonogórskim, w gminie Bojadła, miejscowości: Pyrnik Młynkowo, Kartno, Susłów.
PL-HPAI(P)-2025-00016 W województwie wielkopolskim w powiecie kaliskim:gmina Szczytniki: Mroczki WielkieW województwie łódzkim w powiecie sieradzkim:—w gminie Goszczanów, miejscowości: Chlewo, Chwalęcice, Stojanów, Sulmówek, Świnice Kaliskie, Waliszewice, Wilkszyce—w gminie Błaszki, miejscowości: Kobylniki, Korzenica, Morawki, Nacesławice, Sędzimirowice—w gminie Warta, miejscowości: Krąków, ZielęcinZawierające się w promieniu 3 km od współrzędnych GPS: 51.74103/18.46314 — w gminie Goszczanów, miejscowości: Chlewo, Chwalęcice, Stojanów, Sulmówek, Świnice Kaliskie, Waliszewice, Wilkszyce — w gminie Błaszki, miejscowości: Kobylniki, Korzenica, Morawki, Nacesławice, Sędzimirowice — w gminie Warta, miejscowości: Krąków, Zielęcin 1.3.2025
— w gminie Goszczanów, miejscowości: Chlewo, Chwalęcice, Stojanów, Sulmówek, Świnice Kaliskie, Waliszewice, Wilkszyce
— w gminie Błaszki, miejscowości: Kobylniki, Korzenica, Morawki, Nacesławice, Sędzimirowice
— w gminie Warta, miejscowości: Krąków, Zielęcin
a) w gminie Bieżuń, miejscowości: Bielawy Gołuskie, Dąbrówki na wschód od drogi krajowej 561 oraz na północ od odnogi rzeki Wkra, Dźwierzno, Gołuszyn na południowy zachód od rzeki Dopływ spod Stawiszyna, Karniszyn, Karniszyn-Parcele, Kobyla Łąka, Kocewo, Myślin, Sadłowo, Sadłowo-Parcele, Stawiszyn-Łaziska, Sławęcin na zachód od rzeki Dopływ spod Stawiszyna oraz miasto Bieżuń z wyjątkiem części miejscowości ograniczonej drogą krajową nr 541, ulicą Lawendową oraz ulicą Płocką, Strzeszewo;
b) w gminie Żuromin, miejscowości: Chamsk z wyjątkiem części miejscowości ograniczonej na zachód drogą krajową nr 541, na południe ul. Wyzwolenia oraz na wschód ulicą Mazowiecką aż do granicy miejscowości, Franciszkowo za wyjątkiem części miejscowości na północ od ul. Ponad Lasem, Młudzyn.
1) Surochów, Koniaczów, Munina, Sobiecin, Tuczempy, Zgoda w gminie
2) Wietlin w gminie Laszki;
3) Ostrów w gminie Radymno.
3. powiat giżycki:a.gmina Giżycko: Sterławki Małe, Sterławki Średnie, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Bogacko na południe od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Kronowo i Wrony, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Wrony na zachód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Kamionki i Jagodne Małe;b.gmina Ryn: Sterławki Wielkie, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Jeziorko na północ od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Orło i Szczybały Giżyckie, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Kronowo na południe od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Bałowo i Kamionki. a. gmina Giżycko: Sterławki Małe, Sterławki Średnie, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Bogacko na południe od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Kronowo i Wrony, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Wrony na zachód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Kamionki i Jagodne Małe; b. gmina Ryn: Sterławki Wielkie, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Jeziorko na północ od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Orło i Szczybały Giżyckie, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Kronowo na południe od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Bałowo i Kamionki.
a. gmina Giżycko: Sterławki Małe, Sterławki Średnie, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Bogacko na południe od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Kronowo i Wrony, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Wrony na zachód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Kamionki i Jagodne Małe;
b. gmina Ryn: Sterławki Wielkie, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Jeziorko na północ od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Orło i Szczybały Giżyckie, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Kronowo na południe od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Bałowo i Kamionki.
a. gmina Giżycko: Sterławki Małe, Sterławki Średnie, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Bogacko na południe od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Kronowo i Wrony, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Wrony na zachód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Kamionki i Jagodne Małe;
b. gmina Ryn: Sterławki Wielkie, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Jeziorko na północ od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Orło i Szczybały Giżyckie, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Kronowo na południe od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Bałowo i Kamionki.
1. Część gminy Osina w powiecie goleniowskim,
2. Część gminy Nowogard w powiecie goleniowskim
3. Część gminy Maszewo w powiecie goleniowskim
— woj łódzkie:
— powiat kutnowski, gmina Kutno: Gołębiewek Nowy, Gołębiewek Stary, Krzesin, Wroczyny, Ryków, Krzesin – Parcela, Krzesinówek, Adamów, Adamowice od ul. Krośniewickiej 33 w kierunku miejscowości Skłóty, Podczachy, Franki Wroczyńskie;
— powiat kutnowski, gmina Nowe Ostrowy: Grochów, Wołodrza, Grochówek, Kały – Towarzystwo, Perna;
— powiat kutnowski, gmina Krośniewice: Nowe, Skłóty, Szubina, Szubsk Duży, Witów, Szubsk – Towarzystwo, Cygany, Pomarzany od nr 36 w kierunku miejscowości Szubina, Pawlikowice od nr 22 w kierunku miejscowości Nowe, Iwiczna od nr 29 w kierunku miejscowości Skłóty
1. powiat iławski:a.gmina Kisielice: Byliny, Goryń, Kantowo, Krzywka, Wałdowo, w granicach administracyjnych miasta Kisielice na południe od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Limża i Wola, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Limża na południe od drogi krajowej nr 16, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Łodygowo na południe od drogi krajowej nr 16, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Ogrodzieniec na południe od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Trumieje i Trupel, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Sobiewola na południe od drogi krajowej nr 16. a. gmina Kisielice: Byliny, Goryń, Kantowo, Krzywka, Wałdowo, w granicach administracyjnych miasta Kisielice na południe od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Limża i Wola, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Limża na południe od drogi krajowej nr 16, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Łodygowo na południe od drogi krajowej nr 16, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Ogrodzieniec na południe od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Trumieje i Trupel, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Sobiewola na południe od drogi krajowej nr 16.
a. gmina Kisielice: Byliny, Goryń, Kantowo, Krzywka, Wałdowo, w granicach administracyjnych miasta Kisielice na południe od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Limża i Wola, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Limża na południe od drogi krajowej nr 16, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Łodygowo na południe od drogi krajowej nr 16, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Ogrodzieniec na południe od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Trumieje i Trupel, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Sobiewola na południe od drogi krajowej nr 16.
a. gmina Kisielice: Byliny, Goryń, Kantowo, Krzywka, Wałdowo, w granicach administracyjnych miasta Kisielice na południe od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Limża i Wola, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Limża na południe od drogi krajowej nr 16, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Łodygowo na południe od drogi krajowej nr 16, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Ogrodzieniec na południe od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Trumieje i Trupel, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Sobiewola na południe od drogi krajowej nr 16.
1. powiat giżycki:a.gmina Giżycko: Antonowo, Gajewo, Świdry, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Spytkowo na zachód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Świdry i Kożuchy Wielkie;b.miasto Giżycko. a. gmina Giżycko: Antonowo, Gajewo, Świdry, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Spytkowo na zachód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Świdry i Kożuchy Wielkie; b. miasto Giżycko.
a. gmina Giżycko: Antonowo, Gajewo, Świdry, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Spytkowo na zachód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Świdry i Kożuchy Wielkie;
b. miasto Giżycko.
a. gmina Giżycko: Antonowo, Gajewo, Świdry, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Spytkowo na zachód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Świdry i Kożuchy Wielkie;
b. miasto Giżycko.
1) Ostrów, Kozodrza, Skrzyszów, Ocieka, Zdżary w gminie Ostrów, powiat ropczycko-sędziszowski;
2) Ropczyce – osiedle Pietrzejowa w gminie Ropczyce, powiat ropczycko-sędziszowski;
3) Kochanówka w gminie Dębica, powiat dębicki.
— woj łódzkie:
— powiat zgierski;
1. w gminie Grzegorzew miejscowości: Barłogi, Boguszyniec, Borysławice Zamkowe, Bylice Kolonia, Bylice Wieś, Grodna, Grzegorzew, Kiełczewek, Ponętów Dolny, Zabłocie;
1. w powiecie kępińskim, w gminie Kępno, miejscowości: Mikorzyn, Mechnice, Domanin, Myjomice, Kierzenko, Ostrówiec, Kierzno, Pustkowie Kierzeńskie;
2. w powiecie ostrzeszowskim, w gminie Doruchów, miejscowość: Rudniczysko.
1. powiecie kaliskim, w gminie Opatówek, miejscowości: Dębe-Kolonia, Kobierno, Rożdżały, Tłokinia Kościelna, Tłokinia Mała, Tłokinia Wielka, Słoneczna, Frankowizna, Borów, Zmyślanka;
2. w powiecie kaliskim, w gminie Ceków-Kolonia, miejscowości: Beznatka, Kamień, Bystrek, Cierpiatka, Kamień-Kolonia, Korek, Magdalenów;
3. w powiecie kaliskim, w gminie Koźminek, miejscowości: Dębsko, Emilianów (wraz z Zosina), Tymianek, Pietrzyków, Smółki, Ksawerów, Marianów, Złotniki, Nowy Karolew, Gać Kaliska, Stary Karolew, Chodybki, Moskurnia, miasto Koźminek (wraz z Przydziałki, Słowiki, Warwarówka), Stary Nakwasin;
4. w powiecie kaliskim, w gminie Żelazków miejscowość: Dębe, Florentyna, Ilno, Pólko, Skarszew, Skarszewek;
5. w powiecie kaliskim, w gminie Lisków, miejscowość: Trzebienie, Ciepielew.
— w gminie Goszczanów, miejscowości: Sokołów, Sulmów, Wola Tłomakowa
1) w powiecie nowosolskim, w gminie Kolsko, miejscowości: Konotop, Lipka
2) w powiecie zielonogórskim, w gminie Bojadła, miejscowości: Pyrnik Młynkowo, Kartno, Susłów.
— w gminie Goszczanów, miejscowości: Chlewo, Chwalęcice, Stojanów, Sulmówek, Świnice Kaliskie, Waliszewice, Wilkszyce
— w gminie Błaszki, miejscowości: Kobylniki, Korzenica, Morawki, Nacesławice, Sędzimirowice
— w gminie Warta, miejscowości: Krąków, Zielęcin
ADIS reference number of the outbreak Area comprising: Date until applicable in accordance with Article 39 of Delegated Regulation (EU) 2020/687
PT-HPAI(P)-2025-00002 The parts from the county of Sintra, from the district of Lisboa, that are contained within circle of 3 kilometers radius, centered on GPS coordinates 38.905151N, -9.407569W 8.2.2025
PT-HPAI(NON-P)-2025-00001 The parts from the county of Caldas da Rainha, from the district of Leiria, that are contained within circle of 3 kilometers radius, centered on GPS coordinates 39.434184N, -9.142658W 14.2.2025
PT-HPAI(NON-P)-2025-00003 The parts from the counties of Albergaria-a-Velha, Aveiro and Estarreja, from the district of Aveiro, that are contained within circle of 3 kilometers radius, centered on GPS coordinates 40.675658N, -8.559449W 22.2.2025
ADIS reference number of the outbreak Area comprising: Date until applicable in accordance with Article 55 of Delegated Regulation (EU) 2020/687
Province: Liege
BE-HPAI(NON-P)-2025-00003 Those parts of the municipalities Ans, Bitsingen, Blegny, Chaudfontaine, Dalhem, Herve, Juprelle, Liège, Olne, Oupeye, Saint-Nicolas, Seraing, Soumagne, Trooz and Wezet extending beyond the area described in the protection zone and contained within a circle of a radius of 10 kilometres, centered on WGS84 dec. coordinates long 5,652532, lat 50,659096. 1.3.2025
Those parts of the municipalities Beyne-Heusay, Blegny, Herstal, Luik, Oupeye, Soumagne and Wezet contained within a circle of a radius of 3 kilometres, centered on WGS84 dec. coordinates long 5,652532, lat 50,659096 21.2.2025-1.3.2025
ADIS reference number of the outbreak Area comprising: Date until applicable in accordance with Article 55 of Delegated Regulation (EU) 2020/687
Plovdiv region
BG-HPAI(P)-2025-00001 The following villages in Asenovgrad municipality:—Izbeglii—Kozanovo—Stoevo—Zlatovrah—Muldava—LyaskovoThe following villages in Sadovo municipality:—Sadovo—Bolyartsi—Katunitsa—Karadzhovo—KochevoThe following villages in Rodopi municipality:—Krumovo—YagodovoThe following villages in Kuklen municipality:—Kuklen—Ruen — Izbeglii — Kozanovo — Stoevo — Zlatovrah — Muldava — Lyaskovo — Sadovo — Bolyartsi — Katunitsa — Karadzhovo — Kochevo — Krumovo — Yagodovo — Kuklen — Ruen 23.3.2025
— Izbeglii
— Kozanovo
— Stoevo
— Zlatovrah
— Muldava
— Lyaskovo
— Sadovo
— Bolyartsi
— Katunitsa
— Karadzhovo
— Kochevo
— Krumovo
— Yagodovo
— Kuklen
— Ruen
The following villages in Asenovgrad municipality:—Asenovgrad—BoyantsiThe following villages in Sadovo municipality:—Mominsko — Asenovgrad — Boyantsi — Mominsko 15.3.2025 – 23.3.2025
— Asenovgrad
— Boyantsi
— Mominsko
— Izbeglii
— Kozanovo
— Stoevo
— Zlatovrah
— Muldava
— Lyaskovo
— Sadovo
— Bolyartsi
— Katunitsa
— Karadzhovo
— Kochevo
— Krumovo
— Yagodovo
— Kuklen
— Ruen
— Asenovgrad
— Boyantsi
— Mominsko
ADIS reference number of the outbreak Area comprising: Date until applicable in accordance with Article 55 of Delegated Regulation (EU) 2020/687
BADEN-WÜRTTEMBERG
DE-HPAI(P)-2025-00002 Landkreis Schwäbisch Hall10 km um den Ausbruchsbetrieb mit den GPS-Koordinaten 9.901883/49.197328.Folgende Gebiete sind betroffen:—Gemeinde BlaufeldenGebiet nördlich/nord-westlich von Raboldshausen—Gemeinde BraunsbachOrtsteile Arnsdorf, Braunsbach, Bühlerzimmern, Dörrhof, Döttingen, Elzhausen, Geislingen am Kocher, Hergershof, Jungholzhausen, Orlach, Rückertsbronn, Rückertshausen, Schaalhof, Steinkirchen, Tierberg, Zottishofen—Stadt CrailsheimOrtsteile Buch, Erkenbrechtshausen, Heinkenbusch, Maulach, Ölhaus, Rüddern, Saurach, Triensbach, Weilershof, Wollmershausen—Gemeinde FrankenhardtNörcliche Waldgebiete Burgberg—Stadt GerabronnOrtsteile Amlishagen, Binselberg, Brettachhöhe, Bügenstegen, Gerabronn, Großforst, Hammerschmiede, Himmelreichshof, Holderhof, Horschhof, Hubertushof, Hubertusmühle, Kleinforst, Kupferhof, Liebesdorf,Michelbach an der Heide, Oberweiler, Rechenhausen, Rückershagen, Seibotenberg, Unterweiler, Ziegelhof—Stadt IlshofenOrtsteile Altenberg, Eckartshausen, Gaugshausen, Gebiet nördlich von Hessenau, Großstadel, Kerleweck, Kleinstadel, Lerchenmühle, Niedersteinach, Oberaspach, Oberscheffach, Oberschmerach, Söllbot, Steinbächle, Unteraspach, Unterschmerach, Windisch-Brachbach—Stadt Kirchberg/JagstOrtsteile Diembot, Eichenau, Gaggstatt, Hammerschmiede, Herboldshausen, Hornberg, Kirchberg an der Jagst, Lendsiedel, Lobenhausen, Mistlau, Schöneck, Waldeck, Weckelweiler—Stadt LangenburgOrtsteile Atzenrod, Bächlingen, Großhürden, Kleinhürden, Langenburg, Ludwigsruhe, Nesselbach, Neuhof, Oberregenbach, Unterregenbach—Gemeinde Rot am SeeOrtsteile Beimbach, Bemberg, Gewann Birkenfeld, Heroldhausen, Kleinbrettheim, LAuramühle, LEnkerstetten, Niederwinden, Oberndorf, Oberwinden, Rotmühle, Werdeck—Gemeinde SatteldorfOrtsteile Bölgental—Stadt Schwäbisch HallOrtsteile Hohenstadt, Jagstrot, Neubronn, Otterbach, Ramsbach, Tüngental, Wolpertsdorf—Gemeinde UntermünkheimOrtsteile Gebietsteile östliche Enslingen—Stadt VellbergOrtsteile Großaltdorf, Kleinaltdorf, Lorenzenzimmern—Gemeinde WallhausenOrtsteile Waldgebiet Teile Hornberger Wald—Gemeinde WolpertshausenOrtsteile Cröffelbach, Haßfelden, Heide, Hohenberg, Hopfach, Reinsberg, Rudelsdorf, Unterscheffach, Wolpertshausen — Gemeinde BlaufeldenGebiet nördlich/nord-westlich von Raboldshausen — Gemeinde BraunsbachOrtsteile Arnsdorf, Braunsbach, Bühlerzimmern, Dörrhof, Döttingen, Elzhausen, Geislingen am Kocher, Hergershof, Jungholzhausen, Orlach, Rückertsbronn, Rückertshausen, Schaalhof, Steinkirchen, Tierberg, Zottishofen — Stadt CrailsheimOrtsteile Buch, Erkenbrechtshausen, Heinkenbusch, Maulach, Ölhaus, Rüddern, Saurach, Triensbach, Weilershof, Wollmershausen — Gemeinde FrankenhardtNörcliche Waldgebiete Burgberg — Stadt GerabronnOrtsteile Amlishagen, Binselberg, Brettachhöhe, Bügenstegen, Gerabronn, Großforst, Hammerschmiede, Himmelreichshof, Holderhof, Horschhof, Hubertushof, Hubertusmühle, Kleinforst, Kupferhof, Liebesdorf,Michelbach an der Heide, Oberweiler, Rechenhausen, Rückershagen, Seibotenberg, Unterweiler, Ziegelhof — Stadt IlshofenOrtsteile Altenberg, Eckartshausen, Gaugshausen, Gebiet nördlich von Hessenau, Großstadel, Kerleweck, Kleinstadel, Lerchenmühle, Niedersteinach, Oberaspach, Oberscheffach, Oberschmerach, Söllbot, Steinbächle, Unteraspach, Unterschmerach, Windisch-Brachbach — Stadt Kirchberg/JagstOrtsteile Diembot, Eichenau, Gaggstatt, Hammerschmiede, Herboldshausen, Hornberg, Kirchberg an der Jagst, Lendsiedel, Lobenhausen, Mistlau, Schöneck, Waldeck, Weckelweiler — Stadt LangenburgOrtsteile Atzenrod, Bächlingen, Großhürden, Kleinhürden, Langenburg, Ludwigsruhe, Nesselbach, Neuhof, Oberregenbach, Unterregenbach — Gemeinde Rot am SeeOrtsteile Beimbach, Bemberg, Gewann Birkenfeld, Heroldhausen, Kleinbrettheim, LAuramühle, LEnkerstetten, Niederwinden, Oberndorf, Oberwinden, Rotmühle, Werdeck — Gemeinde SatteldorfOrtsteile Bölgental — Stadt Schwäbisch HallOrtsteile Hohenstadt, Jagstrot, Neubronn, Otterbach, Ramsbach, Tüngental, Wolpertsdorf — Gemeinde UntermünkheimOrtsteile Gebietsteile östliche Enslingen — Stadt VellbergOrtsteile Großaltdorf, Kleinaltdorf, Lorenzenzimmern — Gemeinde WallhausenOrtsteile Waldgebiet Teile Hornberger Wald — Gemeinde WolpertshausenOrtsteile Cröffelbach, Haßfelden, Heide, Hohenberg, Hopfach, Reinsberg, Rudelsdorf, Unterscheffach, Wolpertshausen 14.2.2025
— Gemeinde BlaufeldenGebiet nördlich/nord-westlich von Raboldshausen
— Gemeinde BraunsbachOrtsteile Arnsdorf, Braunsbach, Bühlerzimmern, Dörrhof, Döttingen, Elzhausen, Geislingen am Kocher, Hergershof, Jungholzhausen, Orlach, Rückertsbronn, Rückertshausen, Schaalhof, Steinkirchen, Tierberg, Zottishofen
— Stadt CrailsheimOrtsteile Buch, Erkenbrechtshausen, Heinkenbusch, Maulach, Ölhaus, Rüddern, Saurach, Triensbach, Weilershof, Wollmershausen
— Gemeinde FrankenhardtNörcliche Waldgebiete Burgberg
— Stadt GerabronnOrtsteile Amlishagen, Binselberg, Brettachhöhe, Bügenstegen, Gerabronn, Großforst, Hammerschmiede, Himmelreichshof, Holderhof, Horschhof, Hubertushof, Hubertusmühle, Kleinforst, Kupferhof, Liebesdorf,Michelbach an der Heide, Oberweiler, Rechenhausen, Rückershagen, Seibotenberg, Unterweiler, Ziegelhof
— Stadt IlshofenOrtsteile Altenberg, Eckartshausen, Gaugshausen, Gebiet nördlich von Hessenau, Großstadel, Kerleweck, Kleinstadel, Lerchenmühle, Niedersteinach, Oberaspach, Oberscheffach, Oberschmerach, Söllbot, Steinbächle, Unteraspach, Unterschmerach, Windisch-Brachbach
— Stadt Kirchberg/JagstOrtsteile Diembot, Eichenau, Gaggstatt, Hammerschmiede, Herboldshausen, Hornberg, Kirchberg an der Jagst, Lendsiedel, Lobenhausen, Mistlau, Schöneck, Waldeck, Weckelweiler
— Stadt LangenburgOrtsteile Atzenrod, Bächlingen, Großhürden, Kleinhürden, Langenburg, Ludwigsruhe, Nesselbach, Neuhof, Oberregenbach, Unterregenbach
— Gemeinde Rot am SeeOrtsteile Beimbach, Bemberg, Gewann Birkenfeld, Heroldhausen, Kleinbrettheim, LAuramühle, LEnkerstetten, Niederwinden, Oberndorf, Oberwinden, Rotmühle, Werdeck
— Gemeinde SatteldorfOrtsteile Bölgental
— Stadt Schwäbisch HallOrtsteile Hohenstadt, Jagstrot, Neubronn, Otterbach, Ramsbach, Tüngental, Wolpertsdorf
— Gemeinde UntermünkheimOrtsteile Gebietsteile östliche Enslingen
— Stadt VellbergOrtsteile Großaltdorf, Kleinaltdorf, Lorenzenzimmern
— Gemeinde WallhausenOrtsteile Waldgebiet Teile Hornberger Wald
— Gemeinde WolpertshausenOrtsteile Cröffelbach, Haßfelden, Heide, Hohenberg, Hopfach, Reinsberg, Rudelsdorf, Unterscheffach, Wolpertshausen
Landkreis Schwäbisch Hall3 km Radius um den Ausbruchsbetrieb mit den GPS-Koordinaten 9.901883/49.197328.Folgende Gebiete sind betroffen:—Stadt GerabronnOrtsteile Dünsbach, Elpershofen, Morstein—Stadt IlshofenOrtsteile Großallmerspann und Anteil der Gemarkung Eckartshausen nördlich der L1040 und L2218, Hessenau, Leofels, Obersteinach, Ruppertshofen, Sandelsbronn, Stadtgebiet Ilshofen und Gemarkun Ilshofen—Stadt Kirchberg an der JagstOrtsteile Dörrmenz und Anteile der Gemarkung Lendsiedel mit Ortsteil Kleinallmerspann und südwestliche Anteile zwischen L240 und BAB6—Gemeinde WolpertshausenOrtsteile Hörlebach, Landturm — Stadt GerabronnOrtsteile Dünsbach, Elpershofen, Morstein — Stadt IlshofenOrtsteile Großallmerspann und Anteil der Gemarkung Eckartshausen nördlich der L1040 und L2218, Hessenau, Leofels, Obersteinach, Ruppertshofen, Sandelsbronn, Stadtgebiet Ilshofen und Gemarkun Ilshofen — Stadt Kirchberg an der JagstOrtsteile Dörrmenz und Anteile der Gemarkung Lendsiedel mit Ortsteil Kleinallmerspann und südwestliche Anteile zwischen L240 und BAB6 — Gemeinde WolpertshausenOrtsteile Hörlebach, Landturm 6.2.2025 – 14.2.2025
— Stadt GerabronnOrtsteile Dünsbach, Elpershofen, Morstein
— Stadt IlshofenOrtsteile Großallmerspann und Anteil der Gemarkung Eckartshausen nördlich der L1040 und L2218, Hessenau, Leofels, Obersteinach, Ruppertshofen, Sandelsbronn, Stadtgebiet Ilshofen und Gemarkun Ilshofen
— Stadt Kirchberg an der JagstOrtsteile Dörrmenz und Anteile der Gemarkung Lendsiedel mit Ortsteil Kleinallmerspann und südwestliche Anteile zwischen L240 und BAB6
— Gemeinde WolpertshausenOrtsteile Hörlebach, Landturm
NIEDERSACHSEN
DE-HPAI(P)-2025-00001 Landkreis Oldenburg10 km Radius um den Ausbruchsbetrieb mit den GPS-Koordinaten 8.416550, 53.067303.Betroffen sind Teile der Gemeinden Dötlingen, Ganderkesee, Hatten und Hude.Landkreis Wesermarsch10 km Radius um den Ausbruchsbetrieb mit den GPS-Koordinaten 8.416550, 53.067303.Betroffen sind Teile der Gemeinde Berne 12.2.2025
Landkreis Oldenburg3 km Radius um den Ausbruchsbetrieb mit den GPS-Koordinaten 8.416550, 53.067303.Betroffen sind Teile der Gemeinden Ganderkesee, Hatten und Hude. 4.2.2025-12.2.2025
DE-HPAI(P)-2025-00003 Landkreis Grafschaft Bentheim10 km Radius um den Ausbruchsbetrieb mit den GPS-Koordinaten 6.979736, 52.585098.Betroffen sind Teile der Gemeinden Emlichheim, Esche, Georgsdorf, Gölenkamp, Hoogstede, Neuenhaus, Osterwald, Ringe, Uelsen, Wietmarschen, Wilsum und der Stadt NordhornLandkreis Emsland10 km Radius um den Ausbruchsbetrieb mit den GPS-Koordinaten 6.979736, 52.585098.Betroffen sind Teile der Gemeinden Geeste und Twist 24.2.2025
Landkreis Grafschaft Bentheim3 km Radius um den Ausbruchsbetrieb mit den GPS-Koordinaten 6.979736, 52.585098.Betroffen sind Teile der Gemeinden Hoogstede, Osterwald und Ringe 16.2.2025-24.2.2025
DE-HPAI(P)-2025-00004 Landkreis Aurich10 km Radius um den Ausbruchsbetrieb mit den GPS-Koordinaten 7.612823, 53.484455.Betroffen sind Teile der Gemeinden Großefehn, Ihlow, Wiesmoor und der Stadt Aurich.Landkreis Wittmund10 km Radius um den Ausbruchsbetrieb mit den GPS-Koordinaten 7.612823, 53.484455.Betroffen sind Teile der Gemeinden Blomberg, Dunum, Friedeburg, Neuschoo und der Stadt Wittmund. 8.3.2025
Landkreis Aurich3 km Radius um den Ausbruchsbetrieb mit den GPS-Koordinaten 7.612823, 53.484455.Betroffen sind Teile der Gemeinde Großefehn und der Stadt Aurich. 28.2.2025-8.3.2025
DE-HPAI(P)-2025-00005 Landkreis Friesland10 km Radius um den Ausbruchsbetrieb mit den GPS-Koordinaten 7.897797, 53.702855.Betroffen sind Teile der Gemeinden Wangerland und Wangerooge.Landkreis Wittmund10 km Radius um den Ausbruchsbetrieb mit den GPS-Koordinaten 7.897797, 53.702855.Betroffen sind Teile der Gemeinden Neuharlingersiel, Spiekeroog, Werdum und der Stadt Wittmund. 8.3.2025
Landkreis Friesland3 km Radius um den Ausbruchsbetrieb mit den GPS-Koordinaten 7.897797, 53.702855.Betroffen sind Teile der Gemeinde Wangerland. 27.2.2025-8.3.2025
— Gemeinde BlaufeldenGebiet nördlich/nord-westlich von Raboldshausen
— Gemeinde BraunsbachOrtsteile Arnsdorf, Braunsbach, Bühlerzimmern, Dörrhof, Döttingen, Elzhausen, Geislingen am Kocher, Hergershof, Jungholzhausen, Orlach, Rückertsbronn, Rückertshausen, Schaalhof, Steinkirchen, Tierberg, Zottishofen
— Stadt CrailsheimOrtsteile Buch, Erkenbrechtshausen, Heinkenbusch, Maulach, Ölhaus, Rüddern, Saurach, Triensbach, Weilershof, Wollmershausen
— Gemeinde FrankenhardtNörcliche Waldgebiete Burgberg
— Stadt GerabronnOrtsteile Amlishagen, Binselberg, Brettachhöhe, Bügenstegen, Gerabronn, Großforst, Hammerschmiede, Himmelreichshof, Holderhof, Horschhof, Hubertushof, Hubertusmühle, Kleinforst, Kupferhof, Liebesdorf,Michelbach an der Heide, Oberweiler, Rechenhausen, Rückershagen, Seibotenberg, Unterweiler, Ziegelhof
— Stadt IlshofenOrtsteile Altenberg, Eckartshausen, Gaugshausen, Gebiet nördlich von Hessenau, Großstadel, Kerleweck, Kleinstadel, Lerchenmühle, Niedersteinach, Oberaspach, Oberscheffach, Oberschmerach, Söllbot, Steinbächle, Unteraspach, Unterschmerach, Windisch-Brachbach
— Stadt Kirchberg/JagstOrtsteile Diembot, Eichenau, Gaggstatt, Hammerschmiede, Herboldshausen, Hornberg, Kirchberg an der Jagst, Lendsiedel, Lobenhausen, Mistlau, Schöneck, Waldeck, Weckelweiler
— Stadt LangenburgOrtsteile Atzenrod, Bächlingen, Großhürden, Kleinhürden, Langenburg, Ludwigsruhe, Nesselbach, Neuhof, Oberregenbach, Unterregenbach
— Gemeinde Rot am SeeOrtsteile Beimbach, Bemberg, Gewann Birkenfeld, Heroldhausen, Kleinbrettheim, LAuramühle, LEnkerstetten, Niederwinden, Oberndorf, Oberwinden, Rotmühle, Werdeck
— Gemeinde SatteldorfOrtsteile Bölgental
— Stadt Schwäbisch HallOrtsteile Hohenstadt, Jagstrot, Neubronn, Otterbach, Ramsbach, Tüngental, Wolpertsdorf
— Gemeinde UntermünkheimOrtsteile Gebietsteile östliche Enslingen
— Stadt VellbergOrtsteile Großaltdorf, Kleinaltdorf, Lorenzenzimmern
— Gemeinde WallhausenOrtsteile Waldgebiet Teile Hornberger Wald
— Gemeinde WolpertshausenOrtsteile Cröffelbach, Haßfelden, Heide, Hohenberg, Hopfach, Reinsberg, Rudelsdorf, Unterscheffach, Wolpertshausen
— Stadt GerabronnOrtsteile Dünsbach, Elpershofen, Morstein
— Stadt IlshofenOrtsteile Großallmerspann und Anteil der Gemarkung Eckartshausen nördlich der L1040 und L2218, Hessenau, Leofels, Obersteinach, Ruppertshofen, Sandelsbronn, Stadtgebiet Ilshofen und Gemarkun Ilshofen
— Stadt Kirchberg an der JagstOrtsteile Dörrmenz und Anteile der Gemarkung Lendsiedel mit Ortsteil Kleinallmerspann und südwestliche Anteile zwischen L240 und BAB6
— Gemeinde WolpertshausenOrtsteile Hörlebach, Landturm
ADIS reference number of the outbreak Area comprising: Date until applicable in accordance with Article 55 of Delegated Regulation (EU) 2020/687
Veneto region:
IT-HPAI(P)-2025-00005 The area of the parts of Veneto Region extending beyond the area described in the protection zone and within the circle of a radius of ten kilometres, centred on WGS84 dec. coordinates N 45.307217883, E 10.766098526 7.2.2025
The area of the parts of Veneto Region contained within a circle of radius of three kilometres, centred on WGS84 dec. coordinates N 45.307217883, E 10.766098526 30.1.2025-7.2.2025
IT-HPAI(P)-2025-00006 The area of the parts of Veneto Region extending beyond the area described in the protection zone and within the circle of a radius of ten kilometres, centred on WGS84 dec. coordinates N 45.298310102, E 10.853128524 8.2.2025
The area of the parts of Veneto Region contained within a circle of radius of three kilometres, centred on WGS84 dec. coordinates N 45.298310102, E 10.853128524 31.1.2025-8.2.2025
IT-HPAI(P)-2025-00007 The area of the parts of Veneto Region extending beyond the area described in the protection zone and within the circle of a radius of ten kilometres, centred on WGS84 dec. coordinates N 45.32054, E 10.72671 11.2.2025
The area of the parts of Veneto Region contained within a circle of radius of three kilometres, centred on WGS84 dec. coordinates N 45.32054, E 10.72671 3.2.2025-11.2.2025
IT-HPAI(P)-2025-00008 The area of the parts of Veneto Region extending beyond the area described in the protection zone and within the circle of a radius of ten kilometres, centred on WGS84 dec. coordinates N 45.248221855, E 10.916122239 12.2.2025
The area of the parts of Veneto Region contained within a circle of radius of three kilometres, centred on WGS84 dec. coordinates N 45.248221855, E 10.916122239 4.2.2025-12.2.2025
IT-HPAI(P)-2025-00012 The area of the parts of Veneto Region extending beyond the area described in the protection zone and within the circle of a radius of ten kilometres, centred on WGS84 dec. coordinates N 45.249597, E 10.937853 12.2.2025
The area of the parts of Veneto Region contained within a circle of radius of three kilometres, centred on WGS84 dec. coordinates N 45.249597, E 10.937853 4.2.2025-12.2.2025
IT-HPAI(P)-2025-00013 The area of the parts of Veneto Region extending beyond the area described in the protection zone and within the circle of a radius of ten kilometres, centred on WGS84 dec. coordinates N 45.253118, E 10.935808 12.2.2025
The area of the parts of Veneto Region contained within a circle of radius of three kilometres, centred on WGS84 dec. coordinates N 45.253118, E 10.935808 4.2.2025-12.2.2025
IT-HPAI(P)-2025-00014 The area of the parts of Veneto Region extending beyond the area described in the protection zone and within the circle of a radius of ten kilometres, centred on WGS84 dec. coordinates N 45.355299708, E 10.860377854 14.2.2025
The area of the parts of Veneto Region contained within a circle of radius of three kilometres, centred on WGS84 dec. coordinates N 45.355299708, E 10.860377854 6.2.2025-14.2.2025
IT-HPAI(P)-2025-00015 The area of the parts of Veneto Region extending beyond the area described in the protection zone and within the circle of a radius of ten kilometres, centred on WGS84 dec. coordinates N 45.387097, E 10.845679 16.2.2025
The area of the parts of Veneto Region contained within a circle of radius of three kilometres, centred on WGS84 dec. coordinates N 45.387097, E 10.845679 8.2.2025-16.2.2025
IT-HPAI(P)-2025-00016 The area of the parts of Veneto Region extending beyond the area described in the protection zone and within the circle of a radius of ten kilometres, centred on WGS84 dec. coordinates N 45.328305525, E 10.962802707 16.2.2025
The area of the parts of Veneto Region contained within a circle of radius of three kilometres, centred on WGS84 dec. coordinates N 45.328305525, E 10.962802707 8.2.2025-16.2.2025
IT- HPAI(P)-2025-00018 The area of the parts of Veneto Region extending beyond the area described in the protection zone and within the circle of a radius of ten kilometres, centred on WGS84 dec. coordinates N 45.307002212, E 10.924128439 6.3.2025
The area of the parts of Veneto Region contained within a circle of radius of three kilometres, centred on WGS84 dec. coordinates N 45.307002212, E 10.924128439 26.2.2025-6.3.2025
IT- HPAI(P)-2025-00019 The area of the parts of Veneto Region extending beyond the area described in the protection zone and within the circle of a radius of ten kilometres, centred on WGS84 dec. coordinates N 45.313221094, E 11.032151414 1.3.2025
The area of the parts of Veneto Region contained within a circle of radius of three kilometres, centred on WGS84 dec. coordinates N 45.313221094, E 11.032151414 21.2.2025-1.3.2025
IT- HPAI(P)-2025-00020 The area of the parts of Veneto Region extending beyond the area described in the protection zone and within the circle of a radius of ten kilometres, centred on WGS84 dec. coordinates N 45.416369117, E 10.788320732 5.3.2025
The area of the parts of Veneto Region contained within a circle of radius of three kilometres, centred on WGS84 dec. coordinates N 45.416369117, E 10.788320732 25.2.2025-5.3.2025
Lombardia region:
IT-HPAI(P)-2025-00001 The area of the parts of Lombardia Region extending beyond the area described in the protection zone and within the circle of a radius of ten kilometres, centred on WGS84 dec. coordinates N 45.297148, E 10.761502 16.2.2025
The area of the parts of Lombardia Region contained within a circle of radius of three kilometres, centred on WGS84 dec. coordinates N 45.297148, E 10.761502 8.2.2025-16.2.2025
IT-HPAI(P)-2025-00002 The area of the parts of Lombardia Region extending beyond the area described in the protection zone and within the circle of a radius of ten kilometres, centred on WGS84 dec. coordinates N 45.312173, E 10.785147 21.2.2025
The area of the parts of Lombardia Region contained within a circle of radius of three kilometres, centred on WGS84 dec. coordinates N 45.312173, E 10.785147 13.2.2025-21.2.2025
IT-HPAI(P)-2025-00003 The area of the parts of Lombardia Region extending beyond the area described in the protection zone and within the circle of a radius of ten kilometres, centred on WGS84 dec. coordinates N 45.289988, E 10.765221 20.2.2025
The area of the parts of Lombardia Region contained within a circle of radius of three kilometres, centred on WGS84 dec. coordinates N 45.289988, E 10.765221 12.2.2025-20.2.2025
IT-HPAI(P)-2025-00004 The area of the parts of Lombardia Region extending beyond the area described in the protection zone and within the circle of a radius of ten kilometres, centred on WGS84 dec. coordinates N 45.289456, E 10.758892 20.2.2025
The area of the parts of Lombardia Region contained within a circle of radius of three kilometres, centred on WGS84 dec. coordinates N 45.289456, E 10.758892 12.2.2025-20.2.2025
IT-HPAI(P)-2025-00009 The area of the parts of Lombardia Region extending beyond the area described in the protection zone and within the circle of a radius of ten kilometres, centred on WGS84 dec. coordinates N 45.295545, E 10.762689 22.2.2025
The area of the parts of Lombardia Region contained within a circle of radius of three kilometres, centred on WGS84 dec. coordinates N 45.295545, E 10.762689 14.2.2025-22.2.2025
IT-HPAI(P)-2025-00010 The area of the parts of Lombardia Region extending beyond the area described in the protection zone and within the circle of a radius of ten kilometres, centred on WGS84 dec. coordinates N 45.28669, E 10.780547 23.2.2025
The area of the parts of Lombardia Region contained within a circle of radius of three kilometres, centred on WGS84 dec. coordinates N 45.28669, E 10.780547 15.2.2025-23.2.2025
IT-HPAI(P)-2025-00011 The area of the parts of Lombardia Region extending beyond the area described in the protection zone and within the circle of a radius of ten kilometres, centred on WGS84 dec. coordinates N 45.2787, E 10.800989 16.2.2025
The area of the parts of Lombardia Region contained within a circle of radius of three kilometres, centred on WGS84 dec. coordinates N 45.2787, E 10.800989 8.2.2025-16.2.2025
IT-HPAI(P)-2025-00017 The area of the parts of Lombardia Region extending beyond the area described in the protection zone and within the circle of a radius of ten kilometres, centred on WGS84 dec. coordinates N 45.306725, E 10.794453 22.2.2025
The area of the parts of Lombardia contained within a circle of radius of three kilometres, centred on WGS84 dec. coordinates N 45.306725, E 10.794453 14.2.2025-22.2.2025
Piemonte region:
IT-HPAI(P)-2025-00021 The area of the parts of Piemonte Region extending beyond the area described in the protection zone and within the circle of a radius of ten kilometres, centred on WGS84 dec. coordinates N 45.184691, E 7.95224999 14.3.2025
The area of the parts of Piemonte Region contained within a circle of radius of three kilometres, centred on WGS84 dec. coordinates N 45.184691, E 7.95224999 6.3.2025-14.3.2025
ADIS reference number of the outbreak Area comprising: Date until applicable in accordance with Article 55 of Delegated Regulation (EU) 2020/687
LT-HPAI(P)-2025-00001 Klaipeda district municipality:Agluonenai parish Vanagai village, Dreiziai village, Kantvainiai village, Agluonenai village, Azpurviai village, Grieziai village, Zagarai village, Poskai village, Saukliai village;Priekule parish Drukiai village, Klisiai village, Svencele village, Birzininkai village, Kuodziai village, Venckai village, Gropiskiai village, Voveriskiai village, Stragnai I village, Stragnai II village, Kalviskiai village, Pangesai village, Priekule II village, Budvieciai village, Luzgaliai village, Pleskuciai village, Lingiai village, Joksai village, Pempes village, Mezeliu village, Priekule town, Priekule I village, Dreverna village, Sventvakariai village, Daugmantai village, Pjauliai village;Veivirzenai parish Skomantai village, Dvyliai village, Luisiai village, Bilvietis village, Pozingiai village, Vyskupiskiai village, Sarkiskiai village, Pezaiciai village, Mikuziai village.Silute district municipality:Kintai parish Mockiai village, Paurai village, Sakuciai village, Kintai village, Kiskiai village, Zyniai village, Prycmai village, Kalviskiai village, Kiosiai village, Lamsociai village, Raudziai village;Saugai parish. Aisenai village, Berciske village, Vytuliai village, Alkos village, Miestaliai village, Grynaiciai village, Petreliai village, Medaliai village, Diegliai village, Saugai village, Norkaiciai village, Zemaitkiemis village, Kukorai village, Bruzai village, Lasai village, Stonaiciai village;Sveksna parish Inkakliai village, Jomantai village, Gailaiciai village, Jurgaiciai village, Mataiciai village, Zagatpurviai village, Virkytai village, Kalnalis village, Pociai village. 9.3.2025
Klaipeda district municipality Priekule parish Lankupiai village, Liaunai village, Grumbliai village, Silininkai village.Silutes district municipality Saugu parish Pangiriai village, Sakuteliai village, Grumbliai village., Silininkai village, Ciuteliai village, Mantvydai village, Bundalai village, Stankaiciai village, Vilkmedziai village, Begedziai village, Kabeliai village, Lankupiai village, Vilkyciai village 1.3.2025 – 9.3.2025
ADIS reference number of the outbreak Area comprising: Date until applicable in accordance with Article 55 of Delegated Regulation (EU) 2020/687
Békés vármegye
HU-HPAI(P)-2025-00002 Biharugra, Körösnagyharsány, Körösújfalu és Zsadány Zsáka települések közigazgatási területének a 47.020094 és a 21.493791 GPS-koordináták által meghatározott 10 km sugarú körön belül és védőkörzeten kívül eső területe. 14.2.2025
Szabolcs-Szatmár-Bereg vármegye
HU-HPAI(P)-2025-00001 Bátorliget, Encsencs, Kisléta, Máriapócs, Nyírbátor, Nyírbéltek, Nyírbogát, Nyírcsászári, Nyírderzs, Nyírgyulaj, Nyírkáta, Nyírpilis, Nyírvasvári, Ömböly, Piricse és Terem települések közigazgatási területének a 47.800570 és a 22.150850 GPS-koordináták által meghatározott 10 km sugarú körön belül és védőkörzeten kívül eső területe. 13.2.2025
Nyírbátor, Nyírpilis, Nyírvasvári és Piricse települések közigazgatási területének a 47.800570 és a 22.150850 GPS-koordináták által meghatározott pont körüli 3 km sugarú körön belül eső területe. 5.2.2025 – 13.2.2025
HU-HPAI(P)-2025-00003 Balkány, Bököny, Geszteréd, Nyírgelse, Nyírlugos, Nyírmihálydi és a Szakoly települések közigazgatási területének a a 47.684926 és a 21.866182 GPS-koordináták által meghatározott 10 km sugarú körön belül és védőkörzeten kívül eső területe. 18.2.2025
Balkány település közigazgatási területének a 47.684926 és a 21.866182 GPS-koordináták által meghatározott pont körüli 3 km sugarú körön belül eső területe. 10.2.2025 – 18.2.2025
Hajdú-Bihar vármegye
HU-HPAI(P)-2025-00002 Csökmő, Furta, Komádi, Körösszakál, Körösszegapáti, Magyarhomorog, Mezősas, Újiráz, Vekerd és Zsáka települések közigazgatási területének a 47.020094 és a 21.493791 GPS-koordináták által meghatározott 10 km sugarú körön belül és védőkörzeten kívül eső területe. 14.2.2025
Komádi és Magyarhomorog települések közigazgatási területének a 47.020094 és a 21.493791 GPS-koordináták által meghatározott pont körüli 3 km sugarú körön belül eső területe. 6.2.2025 – 14.2.2025
HU-HPAI(P)-2025-00003 Hajdúhadház, Hajdúsámson, Nyíracsád, Nyíradony és Nyírmártonfalva települések közigazgatási területének a 47.684926 és a 21.866182 GPS-koordináták által meghatározott 10 km sugarú körön belül és védőkörzeten kívül eső területe. 18.2.2025
Nyíradony település közigazgatási területének a 47.684926 és a 21.866182 GPS-koordináták által meghatározott pont körüli 3 km sugarú körön belül eső területe. 10.2.2025 – 18.2.2025
HU-HPAI(P)-2025-00004HU-HPAI(P)-2025-00007 Bakonszeg, Báránd, Berettyóújfalu, Bihardancsháza, Biharnagybajom, Bihartorda, Földes, Kaba, Nagyrábé, Püspökladány, Sáp, Sárrétudvari, Szerep és Tetétlen települések közigazgatási területének a 47.255532, 21.321795, valamint a 47.288012 és a 21.284262 GPS-koordináták által meghatározott 10 km sugarú körön belül és védőkörzeten kívül eső területe. 18.3.2025
Báránd, Bihardancsháza, Földes Nagyrábé és Sáp települések közigazgatási területének a 47.255532, 21.321795 GPS-koordináták által meghatározott pont körüli 3 km sugarú körön belül eső területe. 10.3.2025 – 18.3.2025
Heves vármegye
HU-HPAI(P)-2025-00005 Átány, Boconád, Dormánd, Erdőtelek, Heves, Hevesvezekény, Kál, Kompolt, Kömlő, Pély, Tarnabod, Tarnaméra, Tarnazsadány és Tenk települések közigazgatási területének a 47.623310 és a 20.285607 GPS-koordináták által meghatározott 10 km sugarú körön belül és védőkörzeten kívül eső területe. 3.3.2025
Átány, Heves települések közigazgatási területének a 47.623310 és a 20.285607 GPS-koordináták által meghatározott pont körüli 3 km sugarú körön belül eső területe. 23.2.2025 – 3.3.2025
Jász-Nagykun-Szolnok vármegye
HU-HPAI(P)-2025-00005 Jászivány és a Jászszentandrás települések közigazgatási területének a 47.623310 és a 20.285607 GPS-koordináták által meghatározott 10 km sugarú körön belül eső területe. 3.3.2025
Pest vármegye
HU-HPAI(P)-2025-00006 Aszód, Bag, Domony, Erdőkertes, Galgagyörk, Galgahévíz, Galgamácsa, Gödöllő, Hévízgyörk, Iklad, Isaszeg, Kartal, Kerepes, Mogyoród, Őrbottyán, Szada, Vácegres, Váckisújfalu, Vácszentlászló, Valkó és Veresegyház települések közigazgatási területének a 47.621000 és a 19.383500 GPS-koordináták által meghatározott 10 km sugarú körön belül és védőkörzeten kívül eső területe. 4.3.2025
Bag, Domony, Gödöllő és Veresegyház közigazgatási területének a 47.621000 és a 19.383500 GPS-koordináták által meghatározott pont körüli 3 km sugarú körön belül eső területe. 24.2.2025 – 4.3.2025
ADIS reference number of the outbreak Area comprising: Date until applicable in accordance with Article 55 of Delegated Regulation (EU) 2020/687
Province: Drenthe
DE-HPAI(P)-2025-00003 Those parts of the province Drenthe contained within a circle of a radius of 10 kilometres, centered on WGS84 dec. coordinates long 6.98 lat 52.59 24.2.2025
NL-HPAI(P)-2025-00005 Those parts of the Municipality Súdwest Fryslan in the province of Friesland extending beyond the area described in the protection zone and contained within a circle of a radius of 10 kilometres, centered on WGS84 dec. coordinates long 5.431 / lat 53.049 2.3.2025
Those parts of the Municipality Súdwest Fryslan in the province of Friesland contained within a circle of a radius of 3 kilometres, centered on WGS84 dec. coordinates long 5.431 / lat 53.049 22.2.2025 -2.3.2025
ADIS reference number of the outbreak Area comprising: Date until applicable in accordance with Article 55 of Delegated Regulation (EU) 2020/687
PL-HPAI(P)-2025-00001 woj. łódzkie:—powiat: sieradzkigmina Błaszki: Adamki, Chabierów, Garbów, Gorzałów, Kalinowa, Kobylniki, Kociołki, Kwasków, Orzeżyn, Równa, Tuwalczew, Domaniew, Chociszewgmina Goszczanów: Poprężniki, Wacławów, Gawłowice, Poradzewgmina Warta: Augustynów, Chorążka, Cielce, Czartki, Gać Warcka, Glinno, Góra, Grzybki, Józefów Wiktorów, Krąków, Miedze, Lasek, Miedźno, Mikołajewice, Pierzchnia Góra, Proboszczowice, Raczków, Raszelki, Rossoszyca, Socha, Socha Kolonia, Tądów Dolny, Tądów Górny, Tomisławice, Ustków, Witów, Wola Zadąbrowska Nowa, Wola Zadąbrowska Stara, Zadąbrowie Wiatraczyska, Zielęcin, Kawęczynek, Upuszczew, Głaniszew, Kamionacz, Kamionacz Poduchowny, Nobela, Zakrzewgmina Wróblew: Dziebędów, Inczew, Kościerzyn, Ocin, Próchna, Sędzice, Słomków Mokry, Słomków Suchy, Smardzew, Tubądzin, Kobierzycko, Wróblew, Dąbrówka, Bliźniew,-powiat: poddębickigmina Pęczniew: Brodnia, Brodnia Kolonia, Brzeg, Dabrowa Lubolska, Jadwichna, Lubola, Zagórki,zawierające się w promieniu 10 km od współrzędnych GPS: 51,69097/ 18,63163 — powiat: sieradzki 9.2.2025
— powiat: sieradzki
—woj łódzkie:powiat: sieradzkigmina Warta: Bartochów, Baszków, Duszniki, Dzierzązna, Gołuchy, Jakubice, Łabędzie, Małków, Warta, Włyń, Zagajew, Kamionacz obszar leśnyzawierające się w promieniu 3 km od współrzędnych GPS: 51,69097/ 18,63163 — woj łódzkie: 1.2.2025-9.2.2025
— woj łódzkie:
PL-HPAI(P)-2025-00002PL-HPAI(P)-2025-00007PL-HPAI(P)-2025-00015 W województwie mazowieckim:1)W powiecie żuromińskima)w gminie Bieżuń, miejscowości: Adamowo, Bieżuń część miejscowości ograniczonej drogą krajową nr 541, ulicą Lawendową oraz ulicą Płocką, Dąbrówki z wyjątkiem części miejscowości na wschód od drogi krajowej 561 oraz na północ od odnogi rzeki Wkra, Gołuszyn z wyjątkiem części miejscowości na południowy zachód od rzeki Dopływ spod Stawiszyna, Mak, Małocin, Pełki, Pozga, Sławęcin z wyjątkiem części miejscowości na zachód od rzeki Dopływ spod Stawiszyna, Stanisławowo, Stawiszyn-Zwalewo, Trzaski, Wieluń-Zalesie, Wilewo, Władysławowo, Zgliczyn Pobodzy,b)w gminie Siemiątkowo, miejscowości: Antoniewo, Dzieczewo, Nowa Wieś, Nowopole, Rostowa, Siemiątkowo, Siciarz, Siemiątkowo-Rogale, Sokołowy Kąt, Suwaki,c)w gminie Kuczbork-Osada: Chodubka część miejscowości na południe od ul. Szreńskiej, Olszewko, Zielona.d)w gminie Lutocin, miejscowości: Chromakowo, Dębówka, Elżbiecin, Felcyn, Jonne, Lutocin za wyjątkiem części miejscowości ograniczonej ul. Sierpecką i drogą gminną nr 628, Mojnowo, Obręb, Parlin, Przeradz Mały, Przeradz Nowy, Przeradz Wielki, Seroki, Swojęcin, Siemcichy, Zimolza,e)w gminie Lubowidz, miejscowości: Bądzyn,f)w gminie Żuromin, miejscowości: Brudnice, Będzymin, Cierpigórz, część miejscowości Chamsk ograniczonej na zachód drogą krajową nr 541, na południe ul. Wyzwolenia oraz na wschód ulicą Mazowiecką aż do granicy miejscowości, Dąbrowa, Dębsk, Franciszkowo część miejscowości na północ od ul. Ponad Lasem , Kosewo, Kliczewo Małe, Kliczewo Duże, Kruszewo, Nowe Nadratowo, Olszewo, Poniatowo, Raczyny, Rozwozin, Rzężawy Sadowo, Wiadrowo, Wólka Kliczewska, Stare Nadratowo,g)w gminie Żuromin: miasto Żuromin;2)w powiecie sierpeckim:a)w gminie Zawidz, miejscowości: Jaworowo-Kolonia, Jaworowo-Kłódź, Jaworowo-Lipa, Kosemin,b)w gminie Rościszewo, miejscowości: Lipniki na północny wschód od rzeki Dopływ spod Władysławowa, Ostrów, Polik, Rumunki-Chwały, Rzeszotary- Chwały, Rzeszotary, Rumunki-Stara Wieś, Rzeszotary-Zawady, Września;3)w powiecie mławskim:a)w gminie Radzanów, miejscowości: Bojanowo, Cegielnia Ratowska na zachód od drogi pomiędzy miejscowościami Bielawy i Ratowo, część miejscowości Radzanów ograniczonej od wschodu rzeką Wkrą do ulicy Mławskiej, następnie ulicą Mławską do skrzyżowania z ulicą Raciążską oraz wzdłuż ulicy Raciążskiej aż do granicy miejscowości, Ratowo, Zgliczyn- Glinki, Zgliczyn Witowy,b)w gminie Szreńsk, miejscowości: Pączkowo, Sławkowo, Ługi, Miłotki. 1) W powiecie żuromińskima)w gminie Bieżuń, miejscowości: Adamowo, Bieżuń część miejscowości ograniczonej drogą krajową nr 541, ulicą Lawendową oraz ulicą Płocką, Dąbrówki z wyjątkiem części miejscowości na wschód od drogi krajowej 561 oraz na północ od odnogi rzeki Wkra, Gołuszyn z wyjątkiem części miejscowości na południowy zachód od rzeki Dopływ spod Stawiszyna, Mak, Małocin, Pełki, Pozga, Sławęcin z wyjątkiem części miejscowości na zachód od rzeki Dopływ spod Stawiszyna, Stanisławowo, Stawiszyn-Zwalewo, Trzaski, Wieluń-Zalesie, Wilewo, Władysławowo, Zgliczyn Pobodzy,b)w gminie Siemiątkowo, miejscowości: Antoniewo, Dzieczewo, Nowa Wieś, Nowopole, Rostowa, Siemiątkowo, Siciarz, Siemiątkowo-Rogale, Sokołowy Kąt, Suwaki,c)w gminie Kuczbork-Osada: Chodubka część miejscowości na południe od ul. Szreńskiej, Olszewko, Zielona.d)w gminie Lutocin, miejscowości: Chromakowo, Dębówka, Elżbiecin, Felcyn, Jonne, Lutocin za wyjątkiem części miejscowości ograniczonej ul. Sierpecką i drogą gminną nr 628, Mojnowo, Obręb, Parlin, Przeradz Mały, Przeradz Nowy, Przeradz Wielki, Seroki, Swojęcin, Siemcichy, Zimolza,e)w gminie Lubowidz, miejscowości: Bądzyn,f)w gminie Żuromin, miejscowości: Brudnice, Będzymin, Cierpigórz, część miejscowości Chamsk ograniczonej na zachód drogą krajową nr 541, na południe ul. Wyzwolenia oraz na wschód ulicą Mazowiecką aż do granicy miejscowości, Dąbrowa, Dębsk, Franciszkowo część miejscowości na północ od ul. Ponad Lasem , Kosewo, Kliczewo Małe, Kliczewo Duże, Kruszewo, Nowe Nadratowo, Olszewo, Poniatowo, Raczyny, Rozwozin, Rzężawy Sadowo, Wiadrowo, Wólka Kliczewska, Stare Nadratowo,g)w gminie Żuromin: miasto Żuromin; a) w gminie Bieżuń, miejscowości: Adamowo, Bieżuń część miejscowości ograniczonej drogą krajową nr 541, ulicą Lawendową oraz ulicą Płocką, Dąbrówki z wyjątkiem części miejscowości na wschód od drogi krajowej 561 oraz na północ od odnogi rzeki Wkra, Gołuszyn z wyjątkiem części miejscowości na południowy zachód od rzeki Dopływ spod Stawiszyna, Mak, Małocin, Pełki, Pozga, Sławęcin z wyjątkiem części miejscowości na zachód od rzeki Dopływ spod Stawiszyna, Stanisławowo, Stawiszyn-Zwalewo, Trzaski, Wieluń-Zalesie, Wilewo, Władysławowo, Zgliczyn Pobodzy, b) w gminie Siemiątkowo, miejscowości: Antoniewo, Dzieczewo, Nowa Wieś, Nowopole, Rostowa, Siemiątkowo, Siciarz, Siemiątkowo-Rogale, Sokołowy Kąt, Suwaki, c) w gminie Kuczbork-Osada: Chodubka część miejscowości na południe od ul. Szreńskiej, Olszewko, Zielona. d) w gminie Lutocin, miejscowości: Chromakowo, Dębówka, Elżbiecin, Felcyn, Jonne, Lutocin za wyjątkiem części miejscowości ograniczonej ul. Sierpecką i drogą gminną nr 628, Mojnowo, Obręb, Parlin, Przeradz Mały, Przeradz Nowy, Przeradz Wielki, Seroki, Swojęcin, Siemcichy, Zimolza, e) w gminie Lubowidz, miejscowości: Bądzyn, f) w gminie Żuromin, miejscowości: Brudnice, Będzymin, Cierpigórz, część miejscowości Chamsk ograniczonej na zachód drogą krajową nr 541, na południe ul. Wyzwolenia oraz na wschód ulicą Mazowiecką aż do granicy miejscowości, Dąbrowa, Dębsk, Franciszkowo część miejscowości na północ od ul. Ponad Lasem , Kosewo, Kliczewo Małe, Kliczewo Duże, Kruszewo, Nowe Nadratowo, Olszewo, Poniatowo, Raczyny, Rozwozin, Rzężawy Sadowo, Wiadrowo, Wólka Kliczewska, Stare Nadratowo, g) w gminie Żuromin: miasto Żuromin; 2) w powiecie sierpeckim:a)w gminie Zawidz, miejscowości: Jaworowo-Kolonia, Jaworowo-Kłódź, Jaworowo-Lipa, Kosemin,b)w gminie Rościszewo, miejscowości: Lipniki na północny wschód od rzeki Dopływ spod Władysławowa, Ostrów, Polik, Rumunki-Chwały, Rzeszotary- Chwały, Rzeszotary, Rumunki-Stara Wieś, Rzeszotary-Zawady, Września; a) w gminie Zawidz, miejscowości: Jaworowo-Kolonia, Jaworowo-Kłódź, Jaworowo-Lipa, Kosemin, b) w gminie Rościszewo, miejscowości: Lipniki na północny wschód od rzeki Dopływ spod Władysławowa, Ostrów, Polik, Rumunki-Chwały, Rzeszotary- Chwały, Rzeszotary, Rumunki-Stara Wieś, Rzeszotary-Zawady, Września; 3) w powiecie mławskim:a)w gminie Radzanów, miejscowości: Bojanowo, Cegielnia Ratowska na zachód od drogi pomiędzy miejscowościami Bielawy i Ratowo, część miejscowości Radzanów ograniczonej od wschodu rzeką Wkrą do ulicy Mławskiej, następnie ulicą Mławską do skrzyżowania z ulicą Raciążską oraz wzdłuż ulicy Raciążskiej aż do granicy miejscowości, Ratowo, Zgliczyn- Glinki, Zgliczyn Witowy,b)w gminie Szreńsk, miejscowości: Pączkowo, Sławkowo, Ługi, Miłotki. a) w gminie Radzanów, miejscowości: Bojanowo, Cegielnia Ratowska na zachód od drogi pomiędzy miejscowościami Bielawy i Ratowo, część miejscowości Radzanów ograniczonej od wschodu rzeką Wkrą do ulicy Mławskiej, następnie ulicą Mławską do skrzyżowania z ulicą Raciążską oraz wzdłuż ulicy Raciążskiej aż do granicy miejscowości, Ratowo, Zgliczyn- Glinki, Zgliczyn Witowy, b) w gminie Szreńsk, miejscowości: Pączkowo, Sławkowo, Ługi, Miłotki. 6.3.2025
1) W powiecie żuromińskima)w gminie Bieżuń, miejscowości: Adamowo, Bieżuń część miejscowości ograniczonej drogą krajową nr 541, ulicą Lawendową oraz ulicą Płocką, Dąbrówki z wyjątkiem części miejscowości na wschód od drogi krajowej 561 oraz na północ od odnogi rzeki Wkra, Gołuszyn z wyjątkiem części miejscowości na południowy zachód od rzeki Dopływ spod Stawiszyna, Mak, Małocin, Pełki, Pozga, Sławęcin z wyjątkiem części miejscowości na zachód od rzeki Dopływ spod Stawiszyna, Stanisławowo, Stawiszyn-Zwalewo, Trzaski, Wieluń-Zalesie, Wilewo, Władysławowo, Zgliczyn Pobodzy,b)w gminie Siemiątkowo, miejscowości: Antoniewo, Dzieczewo, Nowa Wieś, Nowopole, Rostowa, Siemiątkowo, Siciarz, Siemiątkowo-Rogale, Sokołowy Kąt, Suwaki,c)w gminie Kuczbork-Osada: Chodubka część miejscowości na południe od ul. Szreńskiej, Olszewko, Zielona.d)w gminie Lutocin, miejscowości: Chromakowo, Dębówka, Elżbiecin, Felcyn, Jonne, Lutocin za wyjątkiem części miejscowości ograniczonej ul. Sierpecką i drogą gminną nr 628, Mojnowo, Obręb, Parlin, Przeradz Mały, Przeradz Nowy, Przeradz Wielki, Seroki, Swojęcin, Siemcichy, Zimolza,e)w gminie Lubowidz, miejscowości: Bądzyn,f)w gminie Żuromin, miejscowości: Brudnice, Będzymin, Cierpigórz, część miejscowości Chamsk ograniczonej na zachód drogą krajową nr 541, na południe ul. Wyzwolenia oraz na wschód ulicą Mazowiecką aż do granicy miejscowości, Dąbrowa, Dębsk, Franciszkowo część miejscowości na północ od ul. Ponad Lasem , Kosewo, Kliczewo Małe, Kliczewo Duże, Kruszewo, Nowe Nadratowo, Olszewo, Poniatowo, Raczyny, Rozwozin, Rzężawy Sadowo, Wiadrowo, Wólka Kliczewska, Stare Nadratowo,g)w gminie Żuromin: miasto Żuromin; a) w gminie Bieżuń, miejscowości: Adamowo, Bieżuń część miejscowości ograniczonej drogą krajową nr 541, ulicą Lawendową oraz ulicą Płocką, Dąbrówki z wyjątkiem części miejscowości na wschód od drogi krajowej 561 oraz na północ od odnogi rzeki Wkra, Gołuszyn z wyjątkiem części miejscowości na południowy zachód od rzeki Dopływ spod Stawiszyna, Mak, Małocin, Pełki, Pozga, Sławęcin z wyjątkiem części miejscowości na zachód od rzeki Dopływ spod Stawiszyna, Stanisławowo, Stawiszyn-Zwalewo, Trzaski, Wieluń-Zalesie, Wilewo, Władysławowo, Zgliczyn Pobodzy, b) w gminie Siemiątkowo, miejscowości: Antoniewo, Dzieczewo, Nowa Wieś, Nowopole, Rostowa, Siemiątkowo, Siciarz, Siemiątkowo-Rogale, Sokołowy Kąt, Suwaki, c) w gminie Kuczbork-Osada: Chodubka część miejscowości na południe od ul. Szreńskiej, Olszewko, Zielona. d) w gminie Lutocin, miejscowości: Chromakowo, Dębówka, Elżbiecin, Felcyn, Jonne, Lutocin za wyjątkiem części miejscowości ograniczonej ul. Sierpecką i drogą gminną nr 628, Mojnowo, Obręb, Parlin, Przeradz Mały, Przeradz Nowy, Przeradz Wielki, Seroki, Swojęcin, Siemcichy, Zimolza, e) w gminie Lubowidz, miejscowości: Bądzyn, f) w gminie Żuromin, miejscowości: Brudnice, Będzymin, Cierpigórz, część miejscowości Chamsk ograniczonej na zachód drogą krajową nr 541, na południe ul. Wyzwolenia oraz na wschód ulicą Mazowiecką aż do granicy miejscowości, Dąbrowa, Dębsk, Franciszkowo część miejscowości na północ od ul. Ponad Lasem , Kosewo, Kliczewo Małe, Kliczewo Duże, Kruszewo, Nowe Nadratowo, Olszewo, Poniatowo, Raczyny, Rozwozin, Rzężawy Sadowo, Wiadrowo, Wólka Kliczewska, Stare Nadratowo, g) w gminie Żuromin: miasto Żuromin;
a) w gminie Bieżuń, miejscowości: Adamowo, Bieżuń część miejscowości ograniczonej drogą krajową nr 541, ulicą Lawendową oraz ulicą Płocką, Dąbrówki z wyjątkiem części miejscowości na wschód od drogi krajowej 561 oraz na północ od odnogi rzeki Wkra, Gołuszyn z wyjątkiem części miejscowości na południowy zachód od rzeki Dopływ spod Stawiszyna, Mak, Małocin, Pełki, Pozga, Sławęcin z wyjątkiem części miejscowości na zachód od rzeki Dopływ spod Stawiszyna, Stanisławowo, Stawiszyn-Zwalewo, Trzaski, Wieluń-Zalesie, Wilewo, Władysławowo, Zgliczyn Pobodzy,
b) w gminie Siemiątkowo, miejscowości: Antoniewo, Dzieczewo, Nowa Wieś, Nowopole, Rostowa, Siemiątkowo, Siciarz, Siemiątkowo-Rogale, Sokołowy Kąt, Suwaki,
c) w gminie Kuczbork-Osada: Chodubka część miejscowości na południe od ul. Szreńskiej, Olszewko, Zielona.
d) w gminie Lutocin, miejscowości: Chromakowo, Dębówka, Elżbiecin, Felcyn, Jonne, Lutocin za wyjątkiem części miejscowości ograniczonej ul. Sierpecką i drogą gminną nr 628, Mojnowo, Obręb, Parlin, Przeradz Mały, Przeradz Nowy, Przeradz Wielki, Seroki, Swojęcin, Siemcichy, Zimolza,
e) w gminie Lubowidz, miejscowości: Bądzyn,
f) w gminie Żuromin, miejscowości: Brudnice, Będzymin, Cierpigórz, część miejscowości Chamsk ograniczonej na zachód drogą krajową nr 541, na południe ul. Wyzwolenia oraz na wschód ulicą Mazowiecką aż do granicy miejscowości, Dąbrowa, Dębsk, Franciszkowo część miejscowości na północ od ul. Ponad Lasem , Kosewo, Kliczewo Małe, Kliczewo Duże, Kruszewo, Nowe Nadratowo, Olszewo, Poniatowo, Raczyny, Rozwozin, Rzężawy Sadowo, Wiadrowo, Wólka Kliczewska, Stare Nadratowo,
g) w gminie Żuromin: miasto Żuromin;
2) w powiecie sierpeckim:a)w gminie Zawidz, miejscowości: Jaworowo-Kolonia, Jaworowo-Kłódź, Jaworowo-Lipa, Kosemin,b)w gminie Rościszewo, miejscowości: Lipniki na północny wschód od rzeki Dopływ spod Władysławowa, Ostrów, Polik, Rumunki-Chwały, Rzeszotary- Chwały, Rzeszotary, Rumunki-Stara Wieś, Rzeszotary-Zawady, Września; a) w gminie Zawidz, miejscowości: Jaworowo-Kolonia, Jaworowo-Kłódź, Jaworowo-Lipa, Kosemin, b) w gminie Rościszewo, miejscowości: Lipniki na północny wschód od rzeki Dopływ spod Władysławowa, Ostrów, Polik, Rumunki-Chwały, Rzeszotary- Chwały, Rzeszotary, Rumunki-Stara Wieś, Rzeszotary-Zawady, Września;
a) w gminie Zawidz, miejscowości: Jaworowo-Kolonia, Jaworowo-Kłódź, Jaworowo-Lipa, Kosemin,
b) w gminie Rościszewo, miejscowości: Lipniki na północny wschód od rzeki Dopływ spod Władysławowa, Ostrów, Polik, Rumunki-Chwały, Rzeszotary- Chwały, Rzeszotary, Rumunki-Stara Wieś, Rzeszotary-Zawady, Września;
3) w powiecie mławskim:a)w gminie Radzanów, miejscowości: Bojanowo, Cegielnia Ratowska na zachód od drogi pomiędzy miejscowościami Bielawy i Ratowo, część miejscowości Radzanów ograniczonej od wschodu rzeką Wkrą do ulicy Mławskiej, następnie ulicą Mławską do skrzyżowania z ulicą Raciążską oraz wzdłuż ulicy Raciążskiej aż do granicy miejscowości, Ratowo, Zgliczyn- Glinki, Zgliczyn Witowy,b)w gminie Szreńsk, miejscowości: Pączkowo, Sławkowo, Ługi, Miłotki. a) w gminie Radzanów, miejscowości: Bojanowo, Cegielnia Ratowska na zachód od drogi pomiędzy miejscowościami Bielawy i Ratowo, część miejscowości Radzanów ograniczonej od wschodu rzeką Wkrą do ulicy Mławskiej, następnie ulicą Mławską do skrzyżowania z ulicą Raciążską oraz wzdłuż ulicy Raciążskiej aż do granicy miejscowości, Ratowo, Zgliczyn- Glinki, Zgliczyn Witowy, b) w gminie Szreńsk, miejscowości: Pączkowo, Sławkowo, Ługi, Miłotki.
a) w gminie Radzanów, miejscowości: Bojanowo, Cegielnia Ratowska na zachód od drogi pomiędzy miejscowościami Bielawy i Ratowo, część miejscowości Radzanów ograniczonej od wschodu rzeką Wkrą do ulicy Mławskiej, następnie ulicą Mławską do skrzyżowania z ulicą Raciążską oraz wzdłuż ulicy Raciążskiej aż do granicy miejscowości, Ratowo, Zgliczyn- Glinki, Zgliczyn Witowy,
b) w gminie Szreńsk, miejscowości: Pączkowo, Sławkowo, Ługi, Miłotki.
W województwie mazowieckim:powiat żuromiński:a)w gminie Bieżuń, miejscowości: Bielawy Gołuskie, Dąbrówki na wschód od drogi krajowej 561 oraz na północ od odnogi rzeki Wkra, Dźwierzno, Gołuszyn na południowy zachód od rzeki Dopływ spod Stawiszyna, Karniszyn, Karniszyn-Parcele, Kobyla Łąka, Kocewo, Myślin, Sadłowo, Sadłowo-Parcele, Stawiszyn-Łaziska, Sławęcin na zachód od rzeki Dopływ spod Stawiszyna oraz miasto Bieżuń z wyjątkiem części miejscowości ograniczonej drogą krajową nr 541, ulicą Lawendową oraz ulicą Płocką, Strzeszewo;b)w gminie Żuromin, miejscowości: Chamsk z wyjątkiem części miejscowości ograniczonej na zachód drogą krajową nr 541, na południe ul. Wyzwolenia oraz na wschód ulicą Mazowiecką aż do granicy miejscowości, Franciszkowo za wyjątkiem części miejscowości na północ od ul. Ponad Lasem, Młudzyn. a) w gminie Bieżuń, miejscowości: Bielawy Gołuskie, Dąbrówki na wschód od drogi krajowej 561 oraz na północ od odnogi rzeki Wkra, Dźwierzno, Gołuszyn na południowy zachód od rzeki Dopływ spod Stawiszyna, Karniszyn, Karniszyn-Parcele, Kobyla Łąka, Kocewo, Myślin, Sadłowo, Sadłowo-Parcele, Stawiszyn-Łaziska, Sławęcin na zachód od rzeki Dopływ spod Stawiszyna oraz miasto Bieżuń z wyjątkiem części miejscowości ograniczonej drogą krajową nr 541, ulicą Lawendową oraz ulicą Płocką, Strzeszewo; b) w gminie Żuromin, miejscowości: Chamsk z wyjątkiem części miejscowości ograniczonej na zachód drogą krajową nr 541, na południe ul. Wyzwolenia oraz na wschód ulicą Mazowiecką aż do granicy miejscowości, Franciszkowo za wyjątkiem części miejscowości na północ od ul. Ponad Lasem, Młudzyn. 26.2.2025-06.3.2025
a) w gminie Bieżuń, miejscowości: Bielawy Gołuskie, Dąbrówki na wschód od drogi krajowej 561 oraz na północ od odnogi rzeki Wkra, Dźwierzno, Gołuszyn na południowy zachód od rzeki Dopływ spod Stawiszyna, Karniszyn, Karniszyn-Parcele, Kobyla Łąka, Kocewo, Myślin, Sadłowo, Sadłowo-Parcele, Stawiszyn-Łaziska, Sławęcin na zachód od rzeki Dopływ spod Stawiszyna oraz miasto Bieżuń z wyjątkiem części miejscowości ograniczonej drogą krajową nr 541, ulicą Lawendową oraz ulicą Płocką, Strzeszewo;
b) w gminie Żuromin, miejscowości: Chamsk z wyjątkiem części miejscowości ograniczonej na zachód drogą krajową nr 541, na południe ul. Wyzwolenia oraz na wschód ulicą Mazowiecką aż do granicy miejscowości, Franciszkowo za wyjątkiem części miejscowości na północ od ul. Ponad Lasem, Młudzyn.
PL-HPAI(NON-P)-2025-00004 W województwie podkarpackim, w powiecie jarosławskim:1)Boratyn, Chłopice, Dobkowice, Jankowice, Lutków, Łowce, Zamiechów w gminie Chłopice;2)Jarosław w gminie miejskiej Jarosław;3)Makowisko, Morawsko i Pełkinie w gminie wiejskiej Jarosław;4)Bobrówka, Charytany, Korzenica, Laszki, Wietlin Pierwszy, Wietlin Trzeci, Wysocko w gminie Laszki;5)Kidałowice, Maleniska, Pawłosiów, Tywonia, Widna Góra, Wierzbna w gminie Pawłosiów;6)Radymno w gminie miejskiej Radymno;7)Duńkowice, Łazy, Michałówka, Ostrów, Skołoszów, Święte, Zamojsce w gminie wiejskiej Radymno;8)Cetula, Piwoda, Radawa, Ryszkowa Wola, Szówsko, Wiązownica, Zapałów w gminie Wiązownica. 1) Boratyn, Chłopice, Dobkowice, Jankowice, Lutków, Łowce, Zamiechów w gminie Chłopice; 2) Jarosław w gminie miejskiej Jarosław; 3) Makowisko, Morawsko i Pełkinie w gminie wiejskiej Jarosław; 4) Bobrówka, Charytany, Korzenica, Laszki, Wietlin Pierwszy, Wietlin Trzeci, Wysocko w gminie Laszki; 5) Kidałowice, Maleniska, Pawłosiów, Tywonia, Widna Góra, Wierzbna w gminie Pawłosiów; 6) Radymno w gminie miejskiej Radymno; 7) Duńkowice, Łazy, Michałówka, Ostrów, Skołoszów, Święte, Zamojsce w gminie wiejskiej Radymno; 8) Cetula, Piwoda, Radawa, Ryszkowa Wola, Szówsko, Wiązownica, Zapałów w gminie Wiązownica. 20.2.2025
1) Boratyn, Chłopice, Dobkowice, Jankowice, Lutków, Łowce, Zamiechów w gminie Chłopice;
2) Jarosław w gminie miejskiej Jarosław;
3) Makowisko, Morawsko i Pełkinie w gminie wiejskiej Jarosław;
4) Bobrówka, Charytany, Korzenica, Laszki, Wietlin Pierwszy, Wietlin Trzeci, Wysocko w gminie Laszki;
5) Kidałowice, Maleniska, Pawłosiów, Tywonia, Widna Góra, Wierzbna w gminie Pawłosiów;
6) Radymno w gminie miejskiej Radymno;
7) Duńkowice, Łazy, Michałówka, Ostrów, Skołoszów, Święte, Zamojsce w gminie wiejskiej Radymno;
8) Cetula, Piwoda, Radawa, Ryszkowa Wola, Szówsko, Wiązownica, Zapałów w gminie Wiązownica.
W województwie podkarpackim, w powiecie jarosławskim:1)Surochów, Koniaczów, Munina, Sobiecin, Tuczempy, Zgoda w gminie wiejskiej Jarosław;2)Wietlin w gminie Laszki;3)Ostrów w gminie Radymno. 1) Surochów, Koniaczów, Munina, Sobiecin, Tuczempy, Zgoda w gminie wiejskiej Jarosław; 2) Wietlin w gminie Laszki; 3) Ostrów w gminie Radymno. 12.2.2025 -20.2.2025
1) Surochów, Koniaczów, Munina, Sobiecin, Tuczempy, Zgoda w gminie wiejskiej Jarosław;
2) Wietlin w gminie Laszki;
3) Ostrów w gminie Radymno.
PL-HPAI(P)-2025-00003 W województwie warmińsko-mazurskim:1.powiat giżycki:a.gmina Giżycko: Bogaczewo, Guty, Kamionki, Kozin, Szczybały Giżyckie, Wilkaski, Wilkasy, Wronka, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Antonowo na zachód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowość Sztynort Mały i Rondo im. św. Jana Pawła II w Giżycku, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Bogacko na północ od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Kronowo i Wrony, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Wrony na wschód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Kamionki i Jagodne Małe;b.gmina Miłki: w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Jagodne Wielkie na północ od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Prażmowo i Grajwo;c.gmina Ryn: Knis, miasto Ryn, Orło, Prażmowo, Skop, Tros, Rudówka, Ryn, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Jeziorko na południe od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Orło i Szczybały Giżyckie, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Kronowo na północ od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Bałowo i Kamionki, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Krzyżany na wschód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Rybical i Koczarki, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Ławki na północ od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Rybical i Prażmowo, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Rybical na północ od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Słabowo i Ławki, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Wejdyki na wschód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Rybical i Krzyżany;d.w granicach administracyjnych miasta Giżycko na zachód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Antonowo i Kleszczewo-Osada.2.powiat kętrzyński:a.gmina Kętrzyn: Bałowo, Martiany, Osewo, Parcz, Pożarki, Salpik, Sykstyny, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Czerniki na wschód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Godzikowo i Jankowo, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Koczarki na wschód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Krzyżany i Nakomiady, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Kwiedzina na wschód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Godzikowo i Jankowo, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Nakomiady na wschód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Koczarki i Kwiedzina, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Wajsznory na wschód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Koczarki i Kwiedzina.3.powiat węgorzewski:a.gmina Węgorzewo: w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Pilwa na południe od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Jankowo i Harsz. 1. powiat giżycki:a.gmina Giżycko: Bogaczewo, Guty, Kamionki, Kozin, Szczybały Giżyckie, Wilkaski, Wilkasy, Wronka, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Antonowo na zachód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowość Sztynort Mały i Rondo im. św. Jana Pawła II w Giżycku, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Bogacko na północ od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Kronowo i Wrony, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Wrony na wschód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Kamionki i Jagodne Małe;b.gmina Miłki: w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Jagodne Wielkie na północ od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Prażmowo i Grajwo;c.gmina Ryn: Knis, miasto Ryn, Orło, Prażmowo, Skop, Tros, Rudówka, Ryn, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Jeziorko na południe od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Orło i Szczybały Giżyckie, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Kronowo na północ od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Bałowo i Kamionki, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Krzyżany na wschód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Rybical i Koczarki, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Ławki na północ od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Rybical i Prażmowo, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Rybical na północ od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Słabowo i Ławki, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Wejdyki na wschód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Rybical i Krzyżany;d.w granicach administracyjnych miasta Giżycko na zachód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Antonowo i Kleszczewo-Osada. a. gmina Giżycko: Bogaczewo, Guty, Kamionki, Kozin, Szczybały Giżyckie, Wilkaski, Wilkasy, Wronka, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Antonowo na zachód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowość Sztynort Mały i Rondo im. św. Jana Pawła II w Giżycku, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Bogacko na północ od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Kronowo i Wrony, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Wrony na wschód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Kamionki i Jagodne Małe; b. gmina Miłki: w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Jagodne Wielkie na północ od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Prażmowo i Grajwo; c. gmina Ryn: Knis, miasto Ryn, Orło, Prażmowo, Skop, Tros, Rudówka, Ryn, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Jeziorko na południe od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Orło i Szczybały Giżyckie, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Kronowo na północ od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Bałowo i Kamionki, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Krzyżany na wschód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Rybical i Koczarki, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Ławki na północ od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Rybical i Prażmowo, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Rybical na północ od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Słabowo i Ławki, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Wejdyki na wschód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Rybical i Krzyżany; d. w granicach administracyjnych miasta Giżycko na zachód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Antonowo i Kleszczewo-Osada. 2. powiat kętrzyński:a.gmina Kętrzyn: Bałowo, Martiany, Osewo, Parcz, Pożarki, Salpik, Sykstyny, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Czerniki na wschód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Godzikowo i Jankowo, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Koczarki na wschód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Krzyżany i Nakomiady, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Kwiedzina na wschód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Godzikowo i Jankowo, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Nakomiady na wschód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Koczarki i Kwiedzina, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Wajsznory na wschód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Koczarki i Kwiedzina. a. gmina Kętrzyn: Bałowo, Martiany, Osewo, Parcz, Pożarki, Salpik, Sykstyny, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Czerniki na wschód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Godzikowo i Jankowo, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Koczarki na wschód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Krzyżany i Nakomiady, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Kwiedzina na wschód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Godzikowo i Jankowo, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Nakomiady na wschód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Koczarki i Kwiedzina, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Wajsznory na wschód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Koczarki i Kwiedzina. 3. powiat węgorzewski:a.gmina Węgorzewo: w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Pilwa na południe od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Jankowo i Harsz. a. gmina Węgorzewo: w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Pilwa na południe od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Jankowo i Harsz. 25.2.2025
1. powiat giżycki:a.gmina Giżycko: Bogaczewo, Guty, Kamionki, Kozin, Szczybały Giżyckie, Wilkaski, Wilkasy, Wronka, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Antonowo na zachód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowość Sztynort Mały i Rondo im. św. Jana Pawła II w Giżycku, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Bogacko na północ od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Kronowo i Wrony, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Wrony na wschód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Kamionki i Jagodne Małe;b.gmina Miłki: w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Jagodne Wielkie na północ od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Prażmowo i Grajwo;c.gmina Ryn: Knis, miasto Ryn, Orło, Prażmowo, Skop, Tros, Rudówka, Ryn, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Jeziorko na południe od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Orło i Szczybały Giżyckie, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Kronowo na północ od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Bałowo i Kamionki, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Krzyżany na wschód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Rybical i Koczarki, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Ławki na północ od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Rybical i Prażmowo, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Rybical na północ od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Słabowo i Ławki, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Wejdyki na wschód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Rybical i Krzyżany;d.w granicach administracyjnych miasta Giżycko na zachód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Antonowo i Kleszczewo-Osada. a. gmina Giżycko: Bogaczewo, Guty, Kamionki, Kozin, Szczybały Giżyckie, Wilkaski, Wilkasy, Wronka, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Antonowo na zachód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowość Sztynort Mały i Rondo im. św. Jana Pawła II w Giżycku, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Bogacko na północ od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Kronowo i Wrony, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Wrony na wschód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Kamionki i Jagodne Małe; b. gmina Miłki: w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Jagodne Wielkie na północ od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Prażmowo i Grajwo; c. gmina Ryn: Knis, miasto Ryn, Orło, Prażmowo, Skop, Tros, Rudówka, Ryn, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Jeziorko na południe od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Orło i Szczybały Giżyckie, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Kronowo na północ od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Bałowo i Kamionki, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Krzyżany na wschód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Rybical i Koczarki, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Ławki na północ od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Rybical i Prażmowo, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Rybical na północ od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Słabowo i Ławki, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Wejdyki na wschód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Rybical i Krzyżany; d. w granicach administracyjnych miasta Giżycko na zachód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Antonowo i Kleszczewo-Osada.
a. gmina Giżycko: Bogaczewo, Guty, Kamionki, Kozin, Szczybały Giżyckie, Wilkaski, Wilkasy, Wronka, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Antonowo na zachód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowość Sztynort Mały i Rondo im. św. Jana Pawła II w Giżycku, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Bogacko na północ od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Kronowo i Wrony, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Wrony na wschód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Kamionki i Jagodne Małe;
b. gmina Miłki: w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Jagodne Wielkie na północ od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Prażmowo i Grajwo;
c. gmina Ryn: Knis, miasto Ryn, Orło, Prażmowo, Skop, Tros, Rudówka, Ryn, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Jeziorko na południe od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Orło i Szczybały Giżyckie, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Kronowo na północ od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Bałowo i Kamionki, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Krzyżany na wschód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Rybical i Koczarki, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Ławki na północ od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Rybical i Prażmowo, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Rybical na północ od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Słabowo i Ławki, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Wejdyki na wschód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Rybical i Krzyżany;
d. w granicach administracyjnych miasta Giżycko na zachód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Antonowo i Kleszczewo-Osada.
2. powiat kętrzyński:a.gmina Kętrzyn: Bałowo, Martiany, Osewo, Parcz, Pożarki, Salpik, Sykstyny, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Czerniki na wschód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Godzikowo i Jankowo, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Koczarki na wschód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Krzyżany i Nakomiady, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Kwiedzina na wschód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Godzikowo i Jankowo, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Nakomiady na wschód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Koczarki i Kwiedzina, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Wajsznory na wschód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Koczarki i Kwiedzina. a. gmina Kętrzyn: Bałowo, Martiany, Osewo, Parcz, Pożarki, Salpik, Sykstyny, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Czerniki na wschód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Godzikowo i Jankowo, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Koczarki na wschód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Krzyżany i Nakomiady, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Kwiedzina na wschód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Godzikowo i Jankowo, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Nakomiady na wschód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Koczarki i Kwiedzina, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Wajsznory na wschód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Koczarki i Kwiedzina.
a. gmina Kętrzyn: Bałowo, Martiany, Osewo, Parcz, Pożarki, Salpik, Sykstyny, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Czerniki na wschód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Godzikowo i Jankowo, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Koczarki na wschód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Krzyżany i Nakomiady, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Kwiedzina na wschód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Godzikowo i Jankowo, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Nakomiady na wschód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Koczarki i Kwiedzina, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Wajsznory na wschód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Koczarki i Kwiedzina.
3. powiat węgorzewski:a.gmina Węgorzewo: w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Pilwa na południe od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Jankowo i Harsz. a. gmina Węgorzewo: w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Pilwa na południe od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Jankowo i Harsz.
a. gmina Węgorzewo: w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Pilwa na południe od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Jankowo i Harsz.
W województwie warmińsko-mazurskim:1.powiat giżycki:a.gmina Giżycko: Sterławki Małe, Sterławki Średnie, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Bogacko na południe od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Kronowo i Wrony, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Wrony na zachód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Kamionki i Jagodne Małe;b.gmina Ryn: Sterławki Wielkie, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Jeziorko na północ od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Orło i Szczybały Giżyckie, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Kronowo na południe od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Bałowo i Kamionki. 1. powiat giżycki:a.gmina Giżycko: Sterławki Małe, Sterławki Średnie, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Bogacko na południe od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Kronowo i Wrony, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Wrony na zachód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Kamionki i Jagodne Małe;b.gmina Ryn: Sterławki Wielkie, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Jeziorko na północ od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Orło i Szczybały Giżyckie, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Kronowo na południe od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Bałowo i Kamionki. a. gmina Giżycko: Sterławki Małe, Sterławki Średnie, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Bogacko na południe od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Kronowo i Wrony, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Wrony na zachód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Kamionki i Jagodne Małe; b. gmina Ryn: Sterławki Wielkie, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Jeziorko na północ od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Orło i Szczybały Giżyckie, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Kronowo na południe od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Bałowo i Kamionki. 17.2.2025 -25.2.2025
1. powiat giżycki:a.gmina Giżycko: Sterławki Małe, Sterławki Średnie, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Bogacko na południe od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Kronowo i Wrony, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Wrony na zachód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Kamionki i Jagodne Małe;b.gmina Ryn: Sterławki Wielkie, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Jeziorko na północ od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Orło i Szczybały Giżyckie, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Kronowo na południe od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Bałowo i Kamionki. a. gmina Giżycko: Sterławki Małe, Sterławki Średnie, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Bogacko na południe od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Kronowo i Wrony, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Wrony na zachód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Kamionki i Jagodne Małe; b. gmina Ryn: Sterławki Wielkie, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Jeziorko na północ od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Orło i Szczybały Giżyckie, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Kronowo na południe od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Bałowo i Kamionki.
a. gmina Giżycko: Sterławki Małe, Sterławki Średnie, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Bogacko na południe od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Kronowo i Wrony, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Wrony na zachód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Kamionki i Jagodne Małe;
b. gmina Ryn: Sterławki Wielkie, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Jeziorko na północ od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Orło i Szczybały Giżyckie, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Kronowo na południe od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Bałowo i Kamionki.
PL-HPAI(P)-2025-00004 Obszar zagrożonyW województwie zachodniopomorskim:1.Część gminy Osina w powiecie goleniowskim2.Cześć gminy Nowogard w powiecie goleniowskim3.Część gminy Maszewo w powiecie goleniowskim4.Część gminy Goleniów w powiecie goleniowskim5.Część gminy Dobra w powiecie łobeskimZawierający się w promieniu 10 km od współrzędnych53.5803715.06903 1. Część gminy Osina w powiecie goleniowskim 2. Cześć gminy Nowogard w powiecie goleniowskim 3. Część gminy Maszewo w powiecie goleniowskim 4. Część gminy Goleniów w powiecie goleniowskim 5. Część gminy Dobra w powiecie łobeskim 26.2.2025
1. Część gminy Osina w powiecie goleniowskim
2. Cześć gminy Nowogard w powiecie goleniowskim
3. Część gminy Maszewo w powiecie goleniowskim
4. Część gminy Goleniów w powiecie goleniowskim
5. Część gminy Dobra w powiecie łobeskim
Obszar zapowietrzony w województwie zachodniopomorskim:1.Część gminy Osina w powiecie goleniowskim,2.Część gminy Nowogard w powiecie goleniowskim3.Część gminy Maszewo w powiecie goleniowskimZawierający się w promieniu 3 km od współrzędnych53.5803715.06903 1. Część gminy Osina w powiecie goleniowskim, 2. Część gminy Nowogard w powiecie goleniowskim 3. Część gminy Maszewo w powiecie goleniowskim 18.2.2025 -26.2.2025
1. Część gminy Osina w powiecie goleniowskim,
2. Część gminy Nowogard w powiecie goleniowskim
3. Część gminy Maszewo w powiecie goleniowskim
PL-HPAI(P)-2025-00005 woj. łódzkie:—powiat kutnowski;gmina Kutno: Miasto Kutno Woźniaków, Grabków, Boża Wola, Byszew, Byszew-Kaczyn, Florek, Gnojno, Gołębiew Nowy, Gołębiew Stary, Głogowiec, Julinki, Leszczynek, Leszno, Malina, Marianki, Nowa Wieś, Nagodów, Piwki, Dudki, Raciborów, Sieciechów, Stanisławów, Wierzbie, Wysoka Wielka, Żurawieniec, Michałów, Kuczków, Wysoka Duża, Kolonia Sójki, Nowe Sójki, Kalinowa, Włosków, Dębina, Kuczków, Adamowice od nr 33 przy drodze krajowej numer 92 (Krośniewicka) w kierunku Miasta Kutno, Siemiennik;—powiat kutnowski;gmina Łanięta: Chrosno, Chruścinek, Klonowiec Wielki, Suchodębie, Wilkowia, Ryszardów, Wola Chruścińska, Świeciny, Kliny, Lipie, Świecinki, Bronisławów, Marianów—powiat kutnowski;gmina Nowe Ostrowy: Grodno, Imielinek, Imielno, Kołomia, Lipiny, Miksztal, Niechcianów, Nowe Ostrowy, Ostrowy, Wola Pierowa, Zieleniec, Nowa Wieś, Rdutów, Błota, Nowe Grodno, Ostrowy PGR;—powiat kutnowski;gmina Strzelce: Klonowiec Stary, Siemianów, Sójki, Wieszczyce, Wola Raciborowska, Zgórze, Sójki – Parcel;—powiat kutnowski;gmina Krośniewice – miasto: Krośniewice, Błonie, Kajew, Bardzinek, Krzewie, Kopy, Teresin, Pniewko, Ostałów, Tumidaj, Głaznów, Raszynek, Bielice, Stara Wieś, Górki Miłońskie, Miłonice, Jankowice, Franki, Kopyta, Wychny Parcela, Suchodoły, Głogowa, Cudniki, Miłosna, Wola Nowska, Godzięby, Luboradz, Wychny, Wymysłów, Zieleniew, Zalesie, Marynin, Nowe Jankowice, Morawce, Iwiczna do nr 29 w kierunku miejscowości Krośniewice, Pomarzany od nr 36 w kierunku miejscowości Krośniewice, Pawlikowice do nr 21 w kierunku miejscowości Krośniewice—powiat kutnowski;gmina Dąbrowice: Ostrówki;—powiat kutnowski;gmina Krzyżanów: Wojciechowice Duże, Zawady;powiat łęczycki;gmina Witonia: Budki Kostusin, Gozdków, Józinki, Olesice, Romartów, Rudniki, Szamów, Uwielinek Folwark, , Wargawa Stara, Wargawka Młoda, Witonia;—powiat łęczycki;gmina Daszyna: Jarochów, Lipówka, Mazew, Ogrodzona, Osędowice, Rzędków, Nowa Żelazna, Stara Żelaznazawierające się w promieniu 10 km od współrzędnych GPS: 52.2460533453/19.2526209874 — powiat kutnowski; — powiat kutnowski; — powiat kutnowski; — powiat kutnowski; — powiat kutnowski; — powiat kutnowski; — powiat kutnowski; — powiat łęczycki; 26.2.2025
— powiat kutnowski;
— powiat kutnowski;
— powiat kutnowski;
— powiat kutnowski;
— powiat kutnowski;
— powiat kutnowski;
— powiat kutnowski;
— powiat łęczycki;
—woj łódzkie :—powiat kutnowski, gmina Kutno: Gołębiewek Nowy, Gołębiewek Stary, Krzesin, Wroczyny, Ryków, Krzesin – Parcela, Krzesinówek, Adamów, Adamowice od ul. Krośniewickiej 33 w kierunku miejscowości Skłóty, Podczachy, Franki Wroczyńskie;—powiat kutnowski, gmina Nowe Ostrowy: Grochów, Wołodrza, Grochówek, Kały – Towarzystwo, Perna;—powiat kutnowski, gmina Krośniewice: Nowe, Skłóty, Szubina, Szubsk Duży, Witów, Szubsk – Towarzystwo, Cygany, Pomarzany od nr 36 w kierunku miejscowości Szubina, Pawlikowice od nr 22 w kierunku miejscowości Nowe, Iwiczna od nr 29 w kierunku miejscowości Skłótyzawierające się w promieniu 3 km od współrzędnych GPS: 52.2460533453/ 19.2526209874 — woj łódzkie : — powiat kutnowski, gmina Kutno: Gołębiewek Nowy, Gołębiewek Stary, Krzesin, Wroczyny, Ryków, Krzesin – Parcela, Krzesinówek, Adamów, Adamowice od ul. Krośniewickiej 33 w kierunku miejscowości Skłóty, Podczachy, Franki Wroczyńskie; — powiat kutnowski, gmina Nowe Ostrowy: Grochów, Wołodrza, Grochówek, Kały – Towarzystwo, Perna; — powiat kutnowski, gmina Krośniewice: Nowe, Skłóty, Szubina, Szubsk Duży, Witów, Szubsk – Towarzystwo, Cygany, Pomarzany od nr 36 w kierunku miejscowości Szubina, Pawlikowice od nr 22 w kierunku miejscowości Nowe, Iwiczna od nr 29 w kierunku miejscowości Skłóty 18.2.2025- 26.2.2025
— woj łódzkie :
— powiat kutnowski, gmina Kutno: Gołębiewek Nowy, Gołębiewek Stary, Krzesin, Wroczyny, Ryków, Krzesin – Parcela, Krzesinówek, Adamów, Adamowice od ul. Krośniewickiej 33 w kierunku miejscowości Skłóty, Podczachy, Franki Wroczyńskie;
— powiat kutnowski, gmina Nowe Ostrowy: Grochów, Wołodrza, Grochówek, Kały – Towarzystwo, Perna;
— powiat kutnowski, gmina Krośniewice: Nowe, Skłóty, Szubina, Szubsk Duży, Witów, Szubsk – Towarzystwo, Cygany, Pomarzany od nr 36 w kierunku miejscowości Szubina, Pawlikowice od nr 22 w kierunku miejscowości Nowe, Iwiczna od nr 29 w kierunku miejscowości Skłóty
PL-HPAI(P)-2025-00006 W województwie warmińsko-mazurskim:1.powiat iławski:a.gmina Iława: Mózgowo, Zazdrość, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Gałdowo na zachód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Gulb i Krzywiec, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Gulb na zachód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Szwarcenowo i Gałdowo.b.gmina Kisielice: Biskupiczki, Butowo, Galinowo, Jędrychowo, Klimy, Łęgowo, Nowy Folwark, Pławty Wielkie, Stary Folwark, Trupel, Wola, w granicach administracyjnych miasta Kisielice na północ od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Limża i Wola, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Limża na północ od drogi krajowej nr 16, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Łodygowo na północ od drogi krajowej nr 16, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Ogrodzieniec na północ od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Trumieje i Trupel, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Sobiewola na północ od drogi krajowej nr 16.c.gmina Susz: w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Wądoły na południe od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Grodziec i Krzywiec.2.powiat nowomiejskia.gmina Biskupiec: Biskupiec, Fitowo, Osówko, Piotrowice, Podlasek, Podlasek Mały, Sędzice, Słupnica, Sumin, Wielka Tymawa, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Czachówki na zachód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Fitowo i Wielka Wólka, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Lipinki na północ od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Mierzyn i Sędzice, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Szwarcenowo na zachód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Czachówki i Gulb.W województwie kujawsko – pomorskim:1.powiat grudziądzki:a.gmina Łasin: Zawda, Szynwałd, Strzelce, Huta Strzelce, Nowe Jankowice, Jankowice, Gordanowo, Zawdzka Wola, Kozłowo, Plesewo Święte, Szonowo Szlacheckie, Goczałki, Łasin Wybudowanieb.gmina Świecie nad Osą: PartęczynyW województwie pomorskim:1.powiat kwidzyński:a.gmina Prabuty: Grodziecb.gmina Gardeja: Wracławek, Trumieje, Wilkowo, Pawłowo 1. powiat iławski:a.gmina Iława: Mózgowo, Zazdrość, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Gałdowo na zachód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Gulb i Krzywiec, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Gulb na zachód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Szwarcenowo i Gałdowo.b.gmina Kisielice: Biskupiczki, Butowo, Galinowo, Jędrychowo, Klimy, Łęgowo, Nowy Folwark, Pławty Wielkie, Stary Folwark, Trupel, Wola, w granicach administracyjnych miasta Kisielice na północ od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Limża i Wola, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Limża na północ od drogi krajowej nr 16, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Łodygowo na północ od drogi krajowej nr 16, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Ogrodzieniec na północ od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Trumieje i Trupel, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Sobiewola na północ od drogi krajowej nr 16.c.gmina Susz: w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Wądoły na południe od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Grodziec i Krzywiec. a. gmina Iława: Mózgowo, Zazdrość, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Gałdowo na zachód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Gulb i Krzywiec, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Gulb na zachód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Szwarcenowo i Gałdowo. b. gmina Kisielice: Biskupiczki, Butowo, Galinowo, Jędrychowo, Klimy, Łęgowo, Nowy Folwark, Pławty Wielkie, Stary Folwark, Trupel, Wola, w granicach administracyjnych miasta Kisielice na północ od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Limża i Wola, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Limża na północ od drogi krajowej nr 16, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Łodygowo na północ od drogi krajowej nr 16, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Ogrodzieniec na północ od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Trumieje i Trupel, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Sobiewola na północ od drogi krajowej nr 16. c. gmina Susz: w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Wądoły na południe od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Grodziec i Krzywiec. 2. powiat nowomiejskia.gmina Biskupiec: Biskupiec, Fitowo, Osówko, Piotrowice, Podlasek, Podlasek Mały, Sędzice, Słupnica, Sumin, Wielka Tymawa, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Czachówki na zachód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Fitowo i Wielka Wólka, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Lipinki na północ od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Mierzyn i Sędzice, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Szwarcenowo na zachód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Czachówki i Gulb. a. gmina Biskupiec: Biskupiec, Fitowo, Osówko, Piotrowice, Podlasek, Podlasek Mały, Sędzice, Słupnica, Sumin, Wielka Tymawa, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Czachówki na zachód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Fitowo i Wielka Wólka, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Lipinki na północ od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Mierzyn i Sędzice, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Szwarcenowo na zachód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Czachówki i Gulb. 1. powiat grudziądzki:a.gmina Łasin: Zawda, Szynwałd, Strzelce, Huta Strzelce, Nowe Jankowice, Jankowice, Gordanowo, Zawdzka Wola, Kozłowo, Plesewo Święte, Szonowo Szlacheckie, Goczałki, Łasin Wybudowanieb.gmina Świecie nad Osą: Partęczyny a. gmina Łasin: Zawda, Szynwałd, Strzelce, Huta Strzelce, Nowe Jankowice, Jankowice, Gordanowo, Zawdzka Wola, Kozłowo, Plesewo Święte, Szonowo Szlacheckie, Goczałki, Łasin Wybudowanie b. gmina Świecie nad Osą: Partęczyny 1. powiat kwidzyński:a.gmina Prabuty: Grodziecb.gmina Gardeja: Wracławek, Trumieje, Wilkowo, Pawłowo a. gmina Prabuty: Grodziec b. gmina Gardeja: Wracławek, Trumieje, Wilkowo, Pawłowo 25.2.2025
1. powiat iławski:a.gmina Iława: Mózgowo, Zazdrość, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Gałdowo na zachód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Gulb i Krzywiec, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Gulb na zachód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Szwarcenowo i Gałdowo.b.gmina Kisielice: Biskupiczki, Butowo, Galinowo, Jędrychowo, Klimy, Łęgowo, Nowy Folwark, Pławty Wielkie, Stary Folwark, Trupel, Wola, w granicach administracyjnych miasta Kisielice na północ od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Limża i Wola, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Limża na północ od drogi krajowej nr 16, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Łodygowo na północ od drogi krajowej nr 16, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Ogrodzieniec na północ od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Trumieje i Trupel, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Sobiewola na północ od drogi krajowej nr 16.c.gmina Susz: w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Wądoły na południe od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Grodziec i Krzywiec. a. gmina Iława: Mózgowo, Zazdrość, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Gałdowo na zachód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Gulb i Krzywiec, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Gulb na zachód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Szwarcenowo i Gałdowo. b. gmina Kisielice: Biskupiczki, Butowo, Galinowo, Jędrychowo, Klimy, Łęgowo, Nowy Folwark, Pławty Wielkie, Stary Folwark, Trupel, Wola, w granicach administracyjnych miasta Kisielice na północ od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Limża i Wola, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Limża na północ od drogi krajowej nr 16, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Łodygowo na północ od drogi krajowej nr 16, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Ogrodzieniec na północ od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Trumieje i Trupel, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Sobiewola na północ od drogi krajowej nr 16. c. gmina Susz: w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Wądoły na południe od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Grodziec i Krzywiec.
a. gmina Iława: Mózgowo, Zazdrość, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Gałdowo na zachód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Gulb i Krzywiec, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Gulb na zachód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Szwarcenowo i Gałdowo.
b. gmina Kisielice: Biskupiczki, Butowo, Galinowo, Jędrychowo, Klimy, Łęgowo, Nowy Folwark, Pławty Wielkie, Stary Folwark, Trupel, Wola, w granicach administracyjnych miasta Kisielice na północ od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Limża i Wola, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Limża na północ od drogi krajowej nr 16, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Łodygowo na północ od drogi krajowej nr 16, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Ogrodzieniec na północ od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Trumieje i Trupel, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Sobiewola na północ od drogi krajowej nr 16.
c. gmina Susz: w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Wądoły na południe od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Grodziec i Krzywiec.
2. powiat nowomiejskia.gmina Biskupiec: Biskupiec, Fitowo, Osówko, Piotrowice, Podlasek, Podlasek Mały, Sędzice, Słupnica, Sumin, Wielka Tymawa, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Czachówki na zachód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Fitowo i Wielka Wólka, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Lipinki na północ od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Mierzyn i Sędzice, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Szwarcenowo na zachód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Czachówki i Gulb. a. gmina Biskupiec: Biskupiec, Fitowo, Osówko, Piotrowice, Podlasek, Podlasek Mały, Sędzice, Słupnica, Sumin, Wielka Tymawa, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Czachówki na zachód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Fitowo i Wielka Wólka, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Lipinki na północ od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Mierzyn i Sędzice, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Szwarcenowo na zachód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Czachówki i Gulb.
a. gmina Biskupiec: Biskupiec, Fitowo, Osówko, Piotrowice, Podlasek, Podlasek Mały, Sędzice, Słupnica, Sumin, Wielka Tymawa, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Czachówki na zachód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Fitowo i Wielka Wólka, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Lipinki na północ od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Mierzyn i Sędzice, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Szwarcenowo na zachód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Czachówki i Gulb.
1. powiat grudziądzki:a.gmina Łasin: Zawda, Szynwałd, Strzelce, Huta Strzelce, Nowe Jankowice, Jankowice, Gordanowo, Zawdzka Wola, Kozłowo, Plesewo Święte, Szonowo Szlacheckie, Goczałki, Łasin Wybudowanieb.gmina Świecie nad Osą: Partęczyny a. gmina Łasin: Zawda, Szynwałd, Strzelce, Huta Strzelce, Nowe Jankowice, Jankowice, Gordanowo, Zawdzka Wola, Kozłowo, Plesewo Święte, Szonowo Szlacheckie, Goczałki, Łasin Wybudowanie b. gmina Świecie nad Osą: Partęczyny
a. gmina Łasin: Zawda, Szynwałd, Strzelce, Huta Strzelce, Nowe Jankowice, Jankowice, Gordanowo, Zawdzka Wola, Kozłowo, Plesewo Święte, Szonowo Szlacheckie, Goczałki, Łasin Wybudowanie
b. gmina Świecie nad Osą: Partęczyny
1. powiat kwidzyński:a.gmina Prabuty: Grodziecb.gmina Gardeja: Wracławek, Trumieje, Wilkowo, Pawłowo a. gmina Prabuty: Grodziec b. gmina Gardeja: Wracławek, Trumieje, Wilkowo, Pawłowo
a. gmina Prabuty: Grodziec
b. gmina Gardeja: Wracławek, Trumieje, Wilkowo, Pawłowo
W województwie warmińsko-mazurskim:1.powiat iławski:a.gmina Kisielice: Byliny, Goryń, Kantowo, Krzywka, Wałdowo, w granicach administracyjnych miasta Kisielice na południe od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Limża i Wola, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Limża na południe od drogi krajowej nr 16, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Łodygowo na południe od drogi krajowej nr 16, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Ogrodzieniec na południe od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Trumieje i Trupel, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Sobiewola na południe od drogi krajowej nr 16. 1. powiat iławski:a.gmina Kisielice: Byliny, Goryń, Kantowo, Krzywka, Wałdowo, w granicach administracyjnych miasta Kisielice na południe od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Limża i Wola, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Limża na południe od drogi krajowej nr 16, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Łodygowo na południe od drogi krajowej nr 16, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Ogrodzieniec na południe od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Trumieje i Trupel, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Sobiewola na południe od drogi krajowej nr 16. a. gmina Kisielice: Byliny, Goryń, Kantowo, Krzywka, Wałdowo, w granicach administracyjnych miasta Kisielice na południe od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Limża i Wola, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Limża na południe od drogi krajowej nr 16, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Łodygowo na południe od drogi krajowej nr 16, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Ogrodzieniec na południe od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Trumieje i Trupel, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Sobiewola na południe od drogi krajowej nr 16. 17.2.2025 – 25.2.2025
1. powiat iławski:a.gmina Kisielice: Byliny, Goryń, Kantowo, Krzywka, Wałdowo, w granicach administracyjnych miasta Kisielice na południe od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Limża i Wola, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Limża na południe od drogi krajowej nr 16, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Łodygowo na południe od drogi krajowej nr 16, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Ogrodzieniec na południe od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Trumieje i Trupel, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Sobiewola na południe od drogi krajowej nr 16. a. gmina Kisielice: Byliny, Goryń, Kantowo, Krzywka, Wałdowo, w granicach administracyjnych miasta Kisielice na południe od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Limża i Wola, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Limża na południe od drogi krajowej nr 16, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Łodygowo na południe od drogi krajowej nr 16, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Ogrodzieniec na południe od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Trumieje i Trupel, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Sobiewola na południe od drogi krajowej nr 16.
a. gmina Kisielice: Byliny, Goryń, Kantowo, Krzywka, Wałdowo, w granicach administracyjnych miasta Kisielice na południe od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Limża i Wola, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Limża na południe od drogi krajowej nr 16, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Łodygowo na południe od drogi krajowej nr 16, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Ogrodzieniec na południe od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Trumieje i Trupel, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Sobiewola na południe od drogi krajowej nr 16.
PL-HPAI(P)-2025-00008 W województwie warmińsko-mazurskim:1.powiat giżycki:a.gmina Giżycko: Bogacko, Grajwo, Guty, Kamionki, Kąp, Kożuchy Wielkie, Pieczonki, Wrony, Sołdany, Sulimy, Szczybały Giżyckie, Upałty Małe, Wilkaski, Wilkasy, Wronka, Wrony, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Bogaczewo na północ od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Rydzewo i Bałowo, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Kruklin na zachód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Brożówka i Staświny, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Spytkowo na wschód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Świdry i Kożuchy Wielkie, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Sterławki Małe na wschód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Skop i Skrzypy;b.gmina Miłki: w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Kleszczewo na północ od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Kozin i Ruda, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Rydzewo na północ od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Kozin i Ruda, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Staświny na północ od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Siedliska i Kozin;c.gmina Kruklanki: w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Kruklanki na zachód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Stręgielek i Szczepanki.2.powiat węgorzewski:a.gmina Pozezdrze: Harsz, Kolonia Pozezdrze, Pieczarki, Wyłudy, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Pozezdrze na południe od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Wyłudy i Okowizna;b.gmina Węgorzewo: w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Łabapa na południe od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Kolonia Rybacka i Skrzypy, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Sztynort Duży na południe od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Kolonia Rybacka i Skrzypy. 1. powiat giżycki:a.gmina Giżycko: Bogacko, Grajwo, Guty, Kamionki, Kąp, Kożuchy Wielkie, Pieczonki, Wrony, Sołdany, Sulimy, Szczybały Giżyckie, Upałty Małe, Wilkaski, Wilkasy, Wronka, Wrony, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Bogaczewo na północ od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Rydzewo i Bałowo, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Kruklin na zachód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Brożówka i Staświny, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Spytkowo na wschód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Świdry i Kożuchy Wielkie, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Sterławki Małe na wschód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Skop i Skrzypy;b.gmina Miłki: w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Kleszczewo na północ od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Kozin i Ruda, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Rydzewo na północ od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Kozin i Ruda, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Staświny na północ od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Siedliska i Kozin;c.gmina Kruklanki: w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Kruklanki na zachód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Stręgielek i Szczepanki. a. gmina Giżycko: Bogacko, Grajwo, Guty, Kamionki, Kąp, Kożuchy Wielkie, Pieczonki, Wrony, Sołdany, Sulimy, Szczybały Giżyckie, Upałty Małe, Wilkaski, Wilkasy, Wronka, Wrony, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Bogaczewo na północ od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Rydzewo i Bałowo, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Kruklin na zachód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Brożówka i Staświny, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Spytkowo na wschód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Świdry i Kożuchy Wielkie, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Sterławki Małe na wschód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Skop i Skrzypy; b. gmina Miłki: w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Kleszczewo na północ od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Kozin i Ruda, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Rydzewo na północ od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Kozin i Ruda, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Staświny na północ od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Siedliska i Kozin; c. gmina Kruklanki: w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Kruklanki na zachód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Stręgielek i Szczepanki. 2. powiat węgorzewski:a.gmina Pozezdrze: Harsz, Kolonia Pozezdrze, Pieczarki, Wyłudy, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Pozezdrze na południe od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Wyłudy i Okowizna;b.gmina Węgorzewo: w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Łabapa na południe od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Kolonia Rybacka i Skrzypy, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Sztynort Duży na południe od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Kolonia Rybacka i Skrzypy. a. gmina Pozezdrze: Harsz, Kolonia Pozezdrze, Pieczarki, Wyłudy, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Pozezdrze na południe od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Wyłudy i Okowizna; b. gmina Węgorzewo: w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Łabapa na południe od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Kolonia Rybacka i Skrzypy, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Sztynort Duży na południe od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Kolonia Rybacka i Skrzypy. 26.2.2025
1. powiat giżycki:a.gmina Giżycko: Bogacko, Grajwo, Guty, Kamionki, Kąp, Kożuchy Wielkie, Pieczonki, Wrony, Sołdany, Sulimy, Szczybały Giżyckie, Upałty Małe, Wilkaski, Wilkasy, Wronka, Wrony, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Bogaczewo na północ od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Rydzewo i Bałowo, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Kruklin na zachód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Brożówka i Staświny, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Spytkowo na wschód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Świdry i Kożuchy Wielkie, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Sterławki Małe na wschód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Skop i Skrzypy;b.gmina Miłki: w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Kleszczewo na północ od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Kozin i Ruda, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Rydzewo na północ od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Kozin i Ruda, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Staświny na północ od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Siedliska i Kozin;c.gmina Kruklanki: w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Kruklanki na zachód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Stręgielek i Szczepanki. a. gmina Giżycko: Bogacko, Grajwo, Guty, Kamionki, Kąp, Kożuchy Wielkie, Pieczonki, Wrony, Sołdany, Sulimy, Szczybały Giżyckie, Upałty Małe, Wilkaski, Wilkasy, Wronka, Wrony, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Bogaczewo na północ od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Rydzewo i Bałowo, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Kruklin na zachód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Brożówka i Staświny, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Spytkowo na wschód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Świdry i Kożuchy Wielkie, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Sterławki Małe na wschód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Skop i Skrzypy; b. gmina Miłki: w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Kleszczewo na północ od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Kozin i Ruda, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Rydzewo na północ od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Kozin i Ruda, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Staświny na północ od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Siedliska i Kozin; c. gmina Kruklanki: w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Kruklanki na zachód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Stręgielek i Szczepanki.
a. gmina Giżycko: Bogacko, Grajwo, Guty, Kamionki, Kąp, Kożuchy Wielkie, Pieczonki, Wrony, Sołdany, Sulimy, Szczybały Giżyckie, Upałty Małe, Wilkaski, Wilkasy, Wronka, Wrony, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Bogaczewo na północ od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Rydzewo i Bałowo, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Kruklin na zachód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Brożówka i Staświny, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Spytkowo na wschód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Świdry i Kożuchy Wielkie, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Sterławki Małe na wschód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Skop i Skrzypy;
b. gmina Miłki: w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Kleszczewo na północ od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Kozin i Ruda, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Rydzewo na północ od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Kozin i Ruda, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Staświny na północ od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Siedliska i Kozin;
c. gmina Kruklanki: w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Kruklanki na zachód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Stręgielek i Szczepanki.
2. powiat węgorzewski:a.gmina Pozezdrze: Harsz, Kolonia Pozezdrze, Pieczarki, Wyłudy, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Pozezdrze na południe od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Wyłudy i Okowizna;b.gmina Węgorzewo: w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Łabapa na południe od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Kolonia Rybacka i Skrzypy, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Sztynort Duży na południe od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Kolonia Rybacka i Skrzypy. a. gmina Pozezdrze: Harsz, Kolonia Pozezdrze, Pieczarki, Wyłudy, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Pozezdrze na południe od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Wyłudy i Okowizna; b. gmina Węgorzewo: w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Łabapa na południe od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Kolonia Rybacka i Skrzypy, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Sztynort Duży na południe od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Kolonia Rybacka i Skrzypy.
a. gmina Pozezdrze: Harsz, Kolonia Pozezdrze, Pieczarki, Wyłudy, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Pozezdrze na południe od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Wyłudy i Okowizna;
b. gmina Węgorzewo: w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Łabapa na południe od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Kolonia Rybacka i Skrzypy, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Sztynort Duży na południe od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Kolonia Rybacka i Skrzypy.
W województwie warmińsko-mazurskim:1.powiat giżycki:a.gmina Giżycko: Antonowo, Gajewo, Świdry, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Spytkowo na zachód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Świdry i Kożuchy Wielkie;b.miasto Giżycko. 1. powiat giżycki:a.gmina Giżycko: Antonowo, Gajewo, Świdry, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Spytkowo na zachód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Świdry i Kożuchy Wielkie;b.miasto Giżycko. a. gmina Giżycko: Antonowo, Gajewo, Świdry, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Spytkowo na zachód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Świdry i Kożuchy Wielkie; b. miasto Giżycko. 18.2.2025 -26.2.2025
1. powiat giżycki:a.gmina Giżycko: Antonowo, Gajewo, Świdry, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Spytkowo na zachód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Świdry i Kożuchy Wielkie;b.miasto Giżycko. a. gmina Giżycko: Antonowo, Gajewo, Świdry, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Spytkowo na zachód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Świdry i Kożuchy Wielkie; b. miasto Giżycko.
a. gmina Giżycko: Antonowo, Gajewo, Świdry, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Spytkowo na zachód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Świdry i Kożuchy Wielkie;
b. miasto Giżycko.
PL-HPAI(P)-2025-00009 W województwie podkarpackim:1)Wola Ociecka, Blizna, Kamionka, Borek Mały w gminie Ostrów, powiat ropczycko-sędziszowski;2)Ruda, Cierpisz, Czarna Sędziszowska, Boreczek, Sędziszów Małopolski oprócz osiedla Kawęczyn Sędziszowski, Góra Ropczycka w gminie Sędziszów Małopolski, powiat ropczycko-sędziszowski;3)Ropczyce – oprócz osiedla Pietrzejowa, Gnojnica, Okonin, Łączki Kucharskie, Brzezówka, Lubzina w gminie Ropczyce, powiat ropczycko-sędziszowski;4)Pustków, Pustków Osiedle, Pustynia, Kozłów, Brzeźnica, Paszczyna, Zawada, Stobierna w gminie Dębica, powiat dębicki;5)Bobrowa Wola, Bobrowa, Korzeniów w gminie Żyraków, powiat dębicki;6)Biały Bór, Tuszyma, Dobrynin w gminie Przecław, powiat mielecki;7)Niwiska, Hucisko, Leszcze w gminie Niwiska, powiat kolbuszowski. 1) Wola Ociecka, Blizna, Kamionka, Borek Mały w gminie Ostrów, powiat ropczycko-sędziszowski; 2) Ruda, Cierpisz, Czarna Sędziszowska, Boreczek, Sędziszów Małopolski oprócz osiedla Kawęczyn Sędziszowski, Góra Ropczycka w gminie Sędziszów Małopolski, powiat ropczycko-sędziszowski; 3) Ropczyce – oprócz osiedla Pietrzejowa, Gnojnica, Okonin, Łączki Kucharskie, Brzezówka, Lubzina w gminie Ropczyce, powiat ropczycko-sędziszowski; 4) Pustków, Pustków Osiedle, Pustynia, Kozłów, Brzeźnica, Paszczyna, Zawada, Stobierna w gminie Dębica, powiat dębicki; 5) Bobrowa Wola, Bobrowa, Korzeniów w gminie Żyraków, powiat dębicki; 6) Biały Bór, Tuszyma, Dobrynin w gminie Przecław, powiat mielecki; 7) Niwiska, Hucisko, Leszcze w gminie Niwiska, powiat kolbuszowski. 3.3.2025
1) Wola Ociecka, Blizna, Kamionka, Borek Mały w gminie Ostrów, powiat ropczycko-sędziszowski;
2) Ruda, Cierpisz, Czarna Sędziszowska, Boreczek, Sędziszów Małopolski oprócz osiedla Kawęczyn Sędziszowski, Góra Ropczycka w gminie Sędziszów Małopolski, powiat ropczycko-sędziszowski;
3) Ropczyce – oprócz osiedla Pietrzejowa, Gnojnica, Okonin, Łączki Kucharskie, Brzezówka, Lubzina w gminie Ropczyce, powiat ropczycko-sędziszowski;
4) Pustków, Pustków Osiedle, Pustynia, Kozłów, Brzeźnica, Paszczyna, Zawada, Stobierna w gminie Dębica, powiat dębicki;
5) Bobrowa Wola, Bobrowa, Korzeniów w gminie Żyraków, powiat dębicki;
6) Biały Bór, Tuszyma, Dobrynin w gminie Przecław, powiat mielecki;
7) Niwiska, Hucisko, Leszcze w gminie Niwiska, powiat kolbuszowski.
W województwie podkarpackim:1)Ostrów, Kozodrza, Skrzyszów, Ocieka, Zdżary w gminie Ostrów, powiat ropczycko-sędziszowski;2)Ropczyce – osiedle Pietrzejowa w gminie Ropczyce, powiat ropczycko-sędziszowski;3)Kochanówka w gminie Dębica, powiat dębicki. 1) Ostrów, Kozodrza, Skrzyszów, Ocieka, Zdżary w gminie Ostrów, powiat ropczycko-sędziszowski; 2) Ropczyce – osiedle Pietrzejowa w gminie Ropczyce, powiat ropczycko-sędziszowski; 3) Kochanówka w gminie Dębica, powiat dębicki. 23.2.2025-3.3.2025
1) Ostrów, Kozodrza, Skrzyszów, Ocieka, Zdżary w gminie Ostrów, powiat ropczycko-sędziszowski;
2) Ropczyce – osiedle Pietrzejowa w gminie Ropczyce, powiat ropczycko-sędziszowski;
3) Kochanówka w gminie Dębica, powiat dębicki.
PL-HPAI(P)-2025-00010 woj. łódzkie:—powiat zgierski;gmina Zgierz: Śladków Górny, Brachowice, Astachowice, Kotowice, Dzierżązna, Kania Góra, Emilia, Rosanów, Słowik, Grotniki, Krzemień, Ustronie, Wiktorów, Adolfów, Dębniak, Ciosny, Jasionka, Ostrów, Swoboda, Bądków, Gieczno (po zachodniej części drogi wojewódzkiej 702), Rogoźno (po zachodniej części drogi wojewódzkiej 702), Grabiszew, Wypychów, Warszyce na zachód od numeru 24, Lućmierz Las (od południowej granicy lasu przy drodze ekspresowej S14 w kierunku północnym do autostrady A2).gmina Ozorków: Sokolniki-Las, Katarzynów, Celestynów, Śliwniki, Aleksandria, Ozorków na południe wzdłuż ul. Granicznej do granicy z korytem rzeki Starówka, dalej wzdłuż ul. Kochanowskiego do ul. Wodnej dalej ulicami: Adamówek, Sikorskiego, Działkowa, Słoneczna, Konopnickiej, Zielona od nr 15a w kierunku zachodnim do ul. Żytniej, na północ wzdłuż ul. Żytniej (w kierunku granicy z miejscowością Śliwniki) wzdłuż koryta rzeki, Pełczyska Solca Wielka, Solca Mała, Sierpów, Wielka Wieś, Modlna, Leśmierz, Konary, Tkaczew, Skromnica, Borszyngmina Parzęczew: Opole, Leźnica Wielka-Osiedle, Leźnica Wielka, Kozikówka, Różyce Żmijowe, Trojany, Sulimy, Mrożewice, Różyce, Chrząstówek, Chrząstów Wielki, Stary Chrząstów, Śniatowa, Parzęczew, Gołaszyny, Ignacew Folwarczny, Ignacew Parzęczewski, Ignacew Rozlazły, Ignacew Podleśny, Florentynów, Nowa Jerozolima, Mikołajew, Sokola Góra, Nowomłyny, Tkaczewska Góra, Mariampol, Radzibórz, Duraj, Pustkowa Góra, Orła, Chociszew, Kowalewice, Mamień, Florianki, Julianki, Konstantki, Piaskowice, Wytrzyszczki, Bibianów, Żelgoszcz, Wielka Wieś, Janów, Mrożewice.—powiat łęczycki;gmina Góra Św. Małgorzaty: Kwiatkówek, Tum, Mętlew, Mierczyn, Witaszewice, Marynki, Góra Świętej Małgorzaty, Kosin, Ambrożew, Orszewice, Nowy Gaj, Stary Gaj, Bryski, Bryski-Kolonia, Karsznice, Moraków, Janów, Bogdańczew, Kosiorów, Podgórzyce, Michałowice.gmina Piątek: Żabokrzeki, Mchowice, Śladków Podleśny, Śladków Rozlazły, Dunaj, Czerników i Mysłówka do granicy z Buguszycami, wzdłuż koryta rzeki Dunaj do nr 30 Mysłówka, następnie na południe do drogi Boguszyce nr 47, dalej drogą do miejscowości Sypin nr 17 następnie do koryta rzeki Moszczenica i na południe do granicy z gminą Zgierz (miejscowość Gieczno).gmina Łęczyca:Topola Katowa, Lubień, Borki, Dzierzbiętów Duży, Dzierzbiętów Mały, miasto Łęczyca.zawierające się w promieniu 10 km od współrzędnych GPS: 51.98213/19.29961 — powiat zgierski; — powiat łęczycki; 1.3.2025
— powiat zgierski;
— powiat łęczycki;
woj łódzkie:—powiat zgierski;gmina Ozorków: Boczki, Skotniki, Małachowice, Małachowice-Kolonia, Sokolniki-Parcela, Sokolniki, Maszkowice, Helenów, Ozorków na północ ulicami Maszkowska (przy granicy z miejscowością Helenów), następnie na zachód wzdłuż ulicy Granicznej do koryta rzeki Bzura dalej wzdłuż ul. Kochanowskiego do ul. Wodnej dalej ulicami: Adamówek, Sikorskiego, Działkowa, Słoneczna, Konopnickiej, Zielona od nr 15a w kierunku zachodnim do ul. Żytniej, na północ wzdłuż ul. Żytniej (w kierunku granicy z miejscowością Śliwniki) wzdłuż koryta rzeki Solanka, Wróblew, Parzyce, Muchówka, Tymienica, Ostrów, Dybówka, Cedrowice, Cedrowice-Parcela, Czerchów, Opalanki.zawierające się w promieniu 3 km od współrzędnych GPS: 51.98213/19.29961 — powiat zgierski; 21.2.2025-1.3.2025
— powiat zgierski;
PL-HPAI(P)-2025-00011 W województwie wielkopolskim, w powiecie kolskim:1.w gminie Olszówka, miejscowości: Adamin, Umień, Złota, Łubianka, Szczepanów, Ostrów Kolonia, Głębokie, Krzewata, Tomaszew, Zawadka, Olszówka, Drzewce, Ponętów Górny;2.w gminie Kłodawa, miejscowości: Bierzwienna Długa Kolonia, Bierzwienna Długa Wieś, Bierzwienna, Krótka, Cząstków, Dąbrówka, Górki, Janczewy, Korzecznik, Krzykosy, Kłodawa, Leszcze, Luboniek, Okoleniec, Pomarzany, Rysiny, Rysiny Kolonia, Tarnówka, Słupeczka;3.w gminie Koło, miejscowości: Aleksandrówka, Chojny, Czołowo, Dąbrowa, Kaczyniec, Kamień, Kiełczew, Smużny Czwarty, Leśnica, Lucjanowo, Mikołajówek, Powiercie Kolonia, Powiercie Wieś, Przybyłów, Ruchenna, Skobielice, Sokołowo, Wrząca Wielka;4.w gminie Kościelec miejscowości: Ruszków Pierwszy, Ruszków Drugi, Dobrów;5.w gminie Babiak, miejscowości: Dębno Królewskie, Dębno Poproboszczowskie, Kiejsze, Korzecznik -Podlesie, Lipie Góry, Maliniec, Nowiny Brdowskie, Osówie, Podkiejsze;6.w gminie Osiek Mały, miejscowości: Borecznia Mała, Borecznia Wielka, Felicjanów, Hilarów, Osiek Wielki;7.w gminie Dąbie miejscowości: Ladorudz, Majdany, Rzuchów, Grabina Wielka;8.w gminie Grzegorzew miejscowości: Ladorudzek, Tarnówka, Borysławice Kościelne;9.Miasto Koło 1. w gminie Olszówka, miejscowości: Adamin, Umień, Złota, Łubianka, Szczepanów, Ostrów Kolonia, Głębokie, Krzewata, Tomaszew, Zawadka, Olszówka, Drzewce, Ponętów Górny; 2. w gminie Kłodawa, miejscowości: Bierzwienna Długa Kolonia, Bierzwienna Długa Wieś, Bierzwienna, Krótka, Cząstków, Dąbrówka, Górki, Janczewy, Korzecznik, Krzykosy, Kłodawa, Leszcze, Luboniek, Okoleniec, Pomarzany, Rysiny, Rysiny Kolonia, Tarnówka, Słupeczka; 3. w gminie Koło, miejscowości: Aleksandrówka, Chojny, Czołowo, Dąbrowa, Kaczyniec, Kamień, Kiełczew, Smużny Czwarty, Leśnica, Lucjanowo, Mikołajówek, Powiercie Kolonia, Powiercie Wieś, Przybyłów, Ruchenna, Skobielice, Sokołowo, Wrząca Wielka; 4. w gminie Kościelec miejscowości: Ruszków Pierwszy, Ruszków Drugi, Dobrów; 5. w gminie Babiak, miejscowości: Dębno Królewskie, Dębno Poproboszczowskie, Kiejsze, Korzecznik -Podlesie, Lipie Góry, Maliniec, Nowiny Brdowskie, Osówie, Podkiejsze; 6. w gminie Osiek Mały, miejscowości: Borecznia Mała, Borecznia Wielka, Felicjanów, Hilarów, Osiek Wielki; 7. w gminie Dąbie miejscowości: Ladorudz, Majdany, Rzuchów, Grabina Wielka; 8. w gminie Grzegorzew miejscowości: Ladorudzek, Tarnówka, Borysławice Kościelne; 9. Miasto Koło 3.3.2025
1. w gminie Olszówka, miejscowości: Adamin, Umień, Złota, Łubianka, Szczepanów, Ostrów Kolonia, Głębokie, Krzewata, Tomaszew, Zawadka, Olszówka, Drzewce, Ponętów Górny;
2. w gminie Kłodawa, miejscowości: Bierzwienna Długa Kolonia, Bierzwienna Długa Wieś, Bierzwienna, Krótka, Cząstków, Dąbrówka, Górki, Janczewy, Korzecznik, Krzykosy, Kłodawa, Leszcze, Luboniek, Okoleniec, Pomarzany, Rysiny, Rysiny Kolonia, Tarnówka, Słupeczka;
3. w gminie Koło, miejscowości: Aleksandrówka, Chojny, Czołowo, Dąbrowa, Kaczyniec, Kamień, Kiełczew, Smużny Czwarty, Leśnica, Lucjanowo, Mikołajówek, Powiercie Kolonia, Powiercie Wieś, Przybyłów, Ruchenna, Skobielice, Sokołowo, Wrząca Wielka;
4. w gminie Kościelec miejscowości: Ruszków Pierwszy, Ruszków Drugi, Dobrów;
5. w gminie Babiak, miejscowości: Dębno Królewskie, Dębno Poproboszczowskie, Kiejsze, Korzecznik -Podlesie, Lipie Góry, Maliniec, Nowiny Brdowskie, Osówie, Podkiejsze;
6. w gminie Osiek Mały, miejscowości: Borecznia Mała, Borecznia Wielka, Felicjanów, Hilarów, Osiek Wielki;
7. w gminie Dąbie miejscowości: Ladorudz, Majdany, Rzuchów, Grabina Wielka;
8. w gminie Grzegorzew miejscowości: Ladorudzek, Tarnówka, Borysławice Kościelne;
9. Miasto Koło
W województwie wielkopolskim w powiecie kolskim:1.w gminie Grzegorzew miejscowości: Barłogi, Boguszyniec, Borysławice Zamkowe, Bylice Kolonia, Bylice Wieś, Grodna, Grzegorzew, Kiełczewek, Ponętów Dolny, Zabłocie;2.w gminie Koło miejscowości: Kiełczew Górny, Kiełczew Smużny I, Wandynów. 1. w gminie Grzegorzew miejscowości: Barłogi, Boguszyniec, Borysławice Zamkowe, Bylice Kolonia, Bylice Wieś, Grodna, Grzegorzew, Kiełczewek, Ponętów Dolny, Zabłocie; 2. w gminie Koło miejscowości: Kiełczew Górny, Kiełczew Smużny I, Wandynów. 23.2.2025-3.3.2025
1. w gminie Grzegorzew miejscowości: Barłogi, Boguszyniec, Borysławice Zamkowe, Bylice Kolonia, Bylice Wieś, Grodna, Grzegorzew, Kiełczewek, Ponętów Dolny, Zabłocie;
2. w gminie Koło miejscowości: Kiełczew Górny, Kiełczew Smużny I, Wandynów.
PL-HPAI(P)-2025-00012 W województwie wielkopolskim:1.w powiecie kępińskim, w gminie Kępno, miejscowości: Rzetnia, Przybyszów, Szklarka Mielęcka, Dziekania, Zosin, Osiny, Kliny, Kępno, Hanulin, Krążkowy, Biały Młyn, Mianowice, Olszowa, Świba;2.w powiecie kępińskim, w gminie Bralin, miejscowości: Chojęcin, Chojęcin-Szum, Weronikopole;3.w powiecie kępińskim, w gminie Baranów, miejscowości: Baranów, Jankowy, Donaborów,4.w powiecie ostrzeszowskim, w gminie Ostrzeszów, miejscowości: Turze, Kochłowy, Malinów, Źródelnia, Dobra, Wiązownia, Królewskie, Olszyna, Ostrzeszów, Ostrzeszów Pustkowie, Rogaszyce;5.w powiecie ostrzeszowskim, w gminie Kobyla Góra, miejscowości: Zmyślona Parzynowska, Parzynów, Osiny;6.w powiecie ostrzeszowskim, w gminie Doruchów, miejscowości: Wygoda Tokarska, Tokarzew, Pieczyska, Godziętowy, Przytocznica, Doruchów, Stara Kuźnica, Zalesie, Gruszków, Pyki, Wygoda Plugawska, Mieleszówka, Skarydzew, Morawin, Plugawice, Oświęcim, Tonia, Wrzosy, Torzeniec;7.w powiecie ostrzeszowskim, w gminie Grabów nad Prosną, miejscowości: Bobrowniki, Marczykowskie, Kuźnica Bobrowska, Bułowe, Marszałki.W województwie łódzkim, w powiecie wieruszowskim:—w gminie Wieruszów: miejscowości w ich granicach administracyjnych Wyszanów, Mieczków Lubczyna, Kowalówka, Cieszęcin, Polesie, Teklinów, Mirków, Miasto Wieruszów, Kuźnica Skakawska, Dobrydział,—w gminie Galewice: Osiek, Kolonia Osiek. 1. w powiecie kępińskim, w gminie Kępno, miejscowości: Rzetnia, Przybyszów, Szklarka Mielęcka, Dziekania, Zosin, Osiny, Kliny, Kępno, Hanulin, Krążkowy, Biały Młyn, Mianowice, Olszowa, Świba; 2. w powiecie kępińskim, w gminie Bralin, miejscowości: Chojęcin, Chojęcin-Szum, Weronikopole; 3. w powiecie kępińskim, w gminie Baranów, miejscowości: Baranów, Jankowy, Donaborów, 4. w powiecie ostrzeszowskim, w gminie Ostrzeszów, miejscowości: Turze, Kochłowy, Malinów, Źródelnia, Dobra, Wiązownia, Królewskie, Olszyna, Ostrzeszów, Ostrzeszów Pustkowie, Rogaszyce; 5. w powiecie ostrzeszowskim, w gminie Kobyla Góra, miejscowości: Zmyślona Parzynowska, Parzynów, Osiny; 6. w powiecie ostrzeszowskim, w gminie Doruchów, miejscowości: Wygoda Tokarska, Tokarzew, Pieczyska, Godziętowy, Przytocznica, Doruchów, Stara Kuźnica, Zalesie, Gruszków, Pyki, Wygoda Plugawska, Mieleszówka, Skarydzew, Morawin, Plugawice, Oświęcim, Tonia, Wrzosy, Torzeniec; 7. w powiecie ostrzeszowskim, w gminie Grabów nad Prosną, miejscowości: Bobrowniki, Marczykowskie, Kuźnica Bobrowska, Bułowe, Marszałki. — w gminie Wieruszów: miejscowości w ich granicach administracyjnych Wyszanów, Mieczków Lubczyna, Kowalówka, Cieszęcin, Polesie, Teklinów, Mirków, Miasto Wieruszów, Kuźnica Skakawska, Dobrydział, — w gminie Galewice: Osiek, Kolonia Osiek. 2.3.2025
1. w powiecie kępińskim, w gminie Kępno, miejscowości: Rzetnia, Przybyszów, Szklarka Mielęcka, Dziekania, Zosin, Osiny, Kliny, Kępno, Hanulin, Krążkowy, Biały Młyn, Mianowice, Olszowa, Świba;
2. w powiecie kępińskim, w gminie Bralin, miejscowości: Chojęcin, Chojęcin-Szum, Weronikopole;
3. w powiecie kępińskim, w gminie Baranów, miejscowości: Baranów, Jankowy, Donaborów,
4. w powiecie ostrzeszowskim, w gminie Ostrzeszów, miejscowości: Turze, Kochłowy, Malinów, Źródelnia, Dobra, Wiązownia, Królewskie, Olszyna, Ostrzeszów, Ostrzeszów Pustkowie, Rogaszyce;
5. w powiecie ostrzeszowskim, w gminie Kobyla Góra, miejscowości: Zmyślona Parzynowska, Parzynów, Osiny;
6. w powiecie ostrzeszowskim, w gminie Doruchów, miejscowości: Wygoda Tokarska, Tokarzew, Pieczyska, Godziętowy, Przytocznica, Doruchów, Stara Kuźnica, Zalesie, Gruszków, Pyki, Wygoda Plugawska, Mieleszówka, Skarydzew, Morawin, Plugawice, Oświęcim, Tonia, Wrzosy, Torzeniec;
7. w powiecie ostrzeszowskim, w gminie Grabów nad Prosną, miejscowości: Bobrowniki, Marczykowskie, Kuźnica Bobrowska, Bułowe, Marszałki.
— w gminie Wieruszów: miejscowości w ich granicach administracyjnych Wyszanów, Mieczków Lubczyna, Kowalówka, Cieszęcin, Polesie, Teklinów, Mirków, Miasto Wieruszów, Kuźnica Skakawska, Dobrydział,
— w gminie Galewice: Osiek, Kolonia Osiek.
W województwie wielkopolskim:1.w powiecie kępińskim, w gminie Kępno, miejscowości: Mikorzyn, Mechnice, Domanin, Myjomice, Kierzenko, Ostrówiec, Kierzno, Pustkowie Kierzeńskie;2.w powiecie ostrzeszowskim, w gminie Doruchów, miejscowość: Rudniczysko.W województwie łódzkim, w powiecie wieruszowskim, w gminie Wieruszów miejscowość Jutrków. 1. w powiecie kępińskim, w gminie Kępno, miejscowości: Mikorzyn, Mechnice, Domanin, Myjomice, Kierzenko, Ostrówiec, Kierzno, Pustkowie Kierzeńskie; 2. w powiecie ostrzeszowskim, w gminie Doruchów, miejscowość: Rudniczysko. 22.2.2025-2.3.2025
1. w powiecie kępińskim, w gminie Kępno, miejscowości: Mikorzyn, Mechnice, Domanin, Myjomice, Kierzenko, Ostrówiec, Kierzno, Pustkowie Kierzeńskie;
2. w powiecie ostrzeszowskim, w gminie Doruchów, miejscowość: Rudniczysko.
PL-HPAI(P)-2025-00013PL-HPAI(P)-2025-00017PL-HPAI(P)-2025-00018 W województwie wielkopolskim:1.w powiecie kaliskim, w gminie Blizanów, miejscowość: Czajków, Zagorzyn, Żegocin, Piotrów, Pawłówek, Pruszków, Warszówka, Poklęków, Pamięcin;2.w powiecie kaliskim, w gminie Koźminek, miejscowości: Bogdanów, Józefina (wraz z Murowaniec), Krzyżówki (wraz z Sokołówka), Młynisko, Nowy Nakwasin, Osuchów, Rogal, Smółki, Oszczeklin, Dąbrowa;3.w powiecie kaliskim, w gminie Ceków-Kolonia, miejscowości: Kosmów-Kolonia, Morawin, Plewnia, Podzborów, Przedzeń, Szadek, Kuźnica, Nowa Plewnia, Ceków-Kolonia, Stare Prażuchy;4.w powiecie kaliskim, w gminie Godziesze Wielkie, miejscowość: Wolica;5.w powiecie kaliskim, w gminie Opatówek, w miejscowości: Opatówek, Chełmce, Cienia Druga (wraz z Bogumiłów), Cienia-Folwark, Cienia Pierwsza, Cienia Trzecia, Janików, Józefów, Michałów Drugi (wraz z Michałów Pierwszy), Nędzerzew, Porwity, Rajsko, Sierzchów, Szałe, Szulec, Tłokinia Nowa, Trojanów, Warszew, Modła, Zawady, Zduny, Michałów Czwarty;6.w powiecie kaliskim, w gminie Szczytniki, miejscowości: Krowica Zawodnia (wraz z Grab), Marchwacz-Kolonia, Trzęsów, Marchwacz, Krowica Pusta, Radliczyce, Cieszyków, Murowaniec, Marcjanów, Szczytniki, Staw, Chojno Lipka, Kościany, Tymieniec, Gorzuchy, Mroczki Wielkie;7.w powiecie kaliskim, w gminie Lisków, miejscowości: Budy Liskowskie, Swoboda, Józefów, Dębniałki, Małgów-Kolonia, Małgów, Strzałków, Chrusty, Nadzież, Madalin, Pyczek, Tomaszew, Lisków, Lisków-Rzgów, Żychów, Wygoda, Annopol, Zakrzyn-Kolonia, Zakrzyn, Koźlątków;8.w powiecie kaliskim, w gminie Mycielin, miejscowość: Kuszyn (wraz z Jaszczury);9.w powiecie kaliskim, w gminie Żelazków, miejscowości: Anielin, Biernatki, Borków Nowy, Borków Stary, Czartki, Garzew, Goliszew, Góry Zborowskie, Góry Złotnickie, Helenów, Janków, Kokanin, Kolonia Kokanin, Kolonia Skarszewek (wraz z Chrusty), Koronka, Michałów, Niedźwiady, Russów, Russówek, Strugi, Szosa Turecka, Tykadłów, Witoldów, Wojciechówka, Zborów, Złotniki Małe, Złotniki Wielkie, Żelazków;10.w mieście Kalisz, osiedla: Adama Asnyka, Chmielnik, Czaszki, Dobro, Dobrzec P, Dobrzec W, Kaliniec, Korczak, Majków, Ogrody, Piskorzewie, Piwonice, Rajsków, Rogatka, Rypinek, Serbinów, Śródmieście, Tyniec, Widok, Winiary, Zagorzynek;11.w powiecie tureckim, w gminie Kawęczyn, miejscowości: Chocim, Żdżary, Będziechów.W województwie łódzkim w powiecie sieradzkim:—w gminie Goszczanów, miejscowości: Lipicze, Lipicze Górne, Lipicze OlendryZawierające się w promieniu 10 km od współrzędnych GPS51.785304/ 18.407166, 1851.786618815/ 18.40688426 1. w powiecie kaliskim, w gminie Blizanów, miejscowość: Czajków, Zagorzyn, Żegocin, Piotrów, Pawłówek, Pruszków, Warszówka, Poklęków, Pamięcin; 2. w powiecie kaliskim, w gminie Koźminek, miejscowości: Bogdanów, Józefina (wraz z Murowaniec), Krzyżówki (wraz z Sokołówka), Młynisko, Nowy Nakwasin, Osuchów, Rogal, Smółki, Oszczeklin, Dąbrowa; 3. w powiecie kaliskim, w gminie Ceków-Kolonia, miejscowości: Kosmów-Kolonia, Morawin, Plewnia, Podzborów, Przedzeń, Szadek, Kuźnica, Nowa Plewnia, Ceków-Kolonia, Stare Prażuchy; 4. w powiecie kaliskim, w gminie Godziesze Wielkie, miejscowość: Wolica; 5. w powiecie kaliskim, w gminie Opatówek, w miejscowości: Opatówek, Chełmce, Cienia Druga (wraz z Bogumiłów), Cienia-Folwark, Cienia Pierwsza, Cienia Trzecia, Janików, Józefów, Michałów Drugi (wraz z Michałów Pierwszy), Nędzerzew, Porwity, Rajsko, Sierzchów, Szałe, Szulec, Tłokinia Nowa, Trojanów, Warszew, Modła, Zawady, Zduny, Michałów Czwarty; 6. w powiecie kaliskim, w gminie Szczytniki, miejscowości: Krowica Zawodnia (wraz z Grab), Marchwacz-Kolonia, Trzęsów, Marchwacz, Krowica Pusta, Radliczyce, Cieszyków, Murowaniec, Marcjanów, Szczytniki, Staw, Chojno Lipka, Kościany, Tymieniec, Gorzuchy, Mroczki Wielkie; 7. w powiecie kaliskim, w gminie Lisków, miejscowości: Budy Liskowskie, Swoboda, Józefów, Dębniałki, Małgów-Kolonia, Małgów, Strzałków, Chrusty, Nadzież, Madalin, Pyczek, Tomaszew, Lisków, Lisków-Rzgów, Żychów, Wygoda, Annopol, Zakrzyn-Kolonia, Zakrzyn, Koźlątków; 8. w powiecie kaliskim, w gminie Mycielin, miejscowość: Kuszyn (wraz z Jaszczury); 9. w powiecie kaliskim, w gminie Żelazków, miejscowości: Anielin, Biernatki, Borków Nowy, Borków Stary, Czartki, Garzew, Goliszew, Góry Zborowskie, Góry Złotnickie, Helenów, Janków, Kokanin, Kolonia Kokanin, Kolonia Skarszewek (wraz z Chrusty), Koronka, Michałów, Niedźwiady, Russów, Russówek, Strugi, Szosa Turecka, Tykadłów, Witoldów, Wojciechówka, Zborów, Złotniki Małe, Złotniki Wielkie, Żelazków; 10. w mieście Kalisz, osiedla: Adama Asnyka, Chmielnik, Czaszki, Dobro, Dobrzec P, Dobrzec W, Kaliniec, Korczak, Majków, Ogrody, Piskorzewie, Piwonice, Rajsków, Rogatka, Rypinek, Serbinów, Śródmieście, Tyniec, Widok, Winiary, Zagorzynek; 11. w powiecie tureckim, w gminie Kawęczyn, miejscowości: Chocim, Żdżary, Będziechów. — w gminie Goszczanów, miejscowości: Lipicze, Lipicze Górne, Lipicze Olendry 10.3.2025
1. w powiecie kaliskim, w gminie Blizanów, miejscowość: Czajków, Zagorzyn, Żegocin, Piotrów, Pawłówek, Pruszków, Warszówka, Poklęków, Pamięcin;
2. w powiecie kaliskim, w gminie Koźminek, miejscowości: Bogdanów, Józefina (wraz z Murowaniec), Krzyżówki (wraz z Sokołówka), Młynisko, Nowy Nakwasin, Osuchów, Rogal, Smółki, Oszczeklin, Dąbrowa;
3. w powiecie kaliskim, w gminie Ceków-Kolonia, miejscowości: Kosmów-Kolonia, Morawin, Plewnia, Podzborów, Przedzeń, Szadek, Kuźnica, Nowa Plewnia, Ceków-Kolonia, Stare Prażuchy;
4. w powiecie kaliskim, w gminie Godziesze Wielkie, miejscowość: Wolica;
5. w powiecie kaliskim, w gminie Opatówek, w miejscowości: Opatówek, Chełmce, Cienia Druga (wraz z Bogumiłów), Cienia-Folwark, Cienia Pierwsza, Cienia Trzecia, Janików, Józefów, Michałów Drugi (wraz z Michałów Pierwszy), Nędzerzew, Porwity, Rajsko, Sierzchów, Szałe, Szulec, Tłokinia Nowa, Trojanów, Warszew, Modła, Zawady, Zduny, Michałów Czwarty;
6. w powiecie kaliskim, w gminie Szczytniki, miejscowości: Krowica Zawodnia (wraz z Grab), Marchwacz-Kolonia, Trzęsów, Marchwacz, Krowica Pusta, Radliczyce, Cieszyków, Murowaniec, Marcjanów, Szczytniki, Staw, Chojno Lipka, Kościany, Tymieniec, Gorzuchy, Mroczki Wielkie;
7. w powiecie kaliskim, w gminie Lisków, miejscowości: Budy Liskowskie, Swoboda, Józefów, Dębniałki, Małgów-Kolonia, Małgów, Strzałków, Chrusty, Nadzież, Madalin, Pyczek, Tomaszew, Lisków, Lisków-Rzgów, Żychów, Wygoda, Annopol, Zakrzyn-Kolonia, Zakrzyn, Koźlątków;
8. w powiecie kaliskim, w gminie Mycielin, miejscowość: Kuszyn (wraz z Jaszczury);
9. w powiecie kaliskim, w gminie Żelazków, miejscowości: Anielin, Biernatki, Borków Nowy, Borków Stary, Czartki, Garzew, Goliszew, Góry Zborowskie, Góry Złotnickie, Helenów, Janków, Kokanin, Kolonia Kokanin, Kolonia Skarszewek (wraz z Chrusty), Koronka, Michałów, Niedźwiady, Russów, Russówek, Strugi, Szosa Turecka, Tykadłów, Witoldów, Wojciechówka, Zborów, Złotniki Małe, Złotniki Wielkie, Żelazków;
10. w mieście Kalisz, osiedla: Adama Asnyka, Chmielnik, Czaszki, Dobro, Dobrzec P, Dobrzec W, Kaliniec, Korczak, Majków, Ogrody, Piskorzewie, Piwonice, Rajsków, Rogatka, Rypinek, Serbinów, Śródmieście, Tyniec, Widok, Winiary, Zagorzynek;
11. w powiecie tureckim, w gminie Kawęczyn, miejscowości: Chocim, Żdżary, Będziechów.
— w gminie Goszczanów, miejscowości: Lipicze, Lipicze Górne, Lipicze Olendry
W województwie wielkopolskim w powiecie kaliskim:1.powiecie kaliskim, w gminie Opatówek, miejscowości: Dębe-Kolonia, Kobierno, Rożdżały, Tłokinia Kościelna, Tłokinia Mała, Tłokinia Wielka, Słoneczna, Frankowizna, Borów, Zmyślanka;2.w powiecie kaliskim, w gminie Ceków-Kolonia, miejscowości: Beznatka, Kamień, Bystrek, Cierpiatka, Kamień-Kolonia, Korek, Magdalenów;3.w powiecie kaliskim, w gminie Koźminek, miejscowości: Dębsko, Emilianów (wraz z Zosina), Tymianek, Pietrzyków, Smółki, Ksawerów, Marianów, Złotniki, Nowy Karolew, Gać Kaliska, Stary Karolew, Chodybki, Moskurnia, miasto Koźminek (wraz z Przydziałki, Słowiki, Warwarówka), Stary Nakwasin;4.w powiecie kaliskim, w gminie Żelazków miejscowość: Dębe, Florentyna, Ilno, Pólko, Skarszew, Skarszewek;5.w powiecie kaliskim, w gminie Lisków, miejscowość: Trzebienie, Ciepielew.W województwie łódzkim w powiecie sieradzkim:—w gminie Goszczanów, miejscowości: Sokołów, Sulmów, Wola TłomakowaZawierające się w promieniu 3 km od współrzędnych GPS51.785304/ 18.407166, 1851.786618815/ 18.40688426 1. powiecie kaliskim, w gminie Opatówek, miejscowości: Dębe-Kolonia, Kobierno, Rożdżały, Tłokinia Kościelna, Tłokinia Mała, Tłokinia Wielka, Słoneczna, Frankowizna, Borów, Zmyślanka; 2. w powiecie kaliskim, w gminie Ceków-Kolonia, miejscowości: Beznatka, Kamień, Bystrek, Cierpiatka, Kamień-Kolonia, Korek, Magdalenów; 3. w powiecie kaliskim, w gminie Koźminek, miejscowości: Dębsko, Emilianów (wraz z Zosina), Tymianek, Pietrzyków, Smółki, Ksawerów, Marianów, Złotniki, Nowy Karolew, Gać Kaliska, Stary Karolew, Chodybki, Moskurnia, miasto Koźminek (wraz z Przydziałki, Słowiki, Warwarówka), Stary Nakwasin; 4. w powiecie kaliskim, w gminie Żelazków miejscowość: Dębe, Florentyna, Ilno, Pólko, Skarszew, Skarszewek; 5. w powiecie kaliskim, w gminie Lisków, miejscowość: Trzebienie, Ciepielew. — w gminie Goszczanów, miejscowości: Sokołów, Sulmów, Wola Tłomakowa 2.3.2025-10.3.2025
1. powiecie kaliskim, w gminie Opatówek, miejscowości: Dębe-Kolonia, Kobierno, Rożdżały, Tłokinia Kościelna, Tłokinia Mała, Tłokinia Wielka, Słoneczna, Frankowizna, Borów, Zmyślanka;
2. w powiecie kaliskim, w gminie Ceków-Kolonia, miejscowości: Beznatka, Kamień, Bystrek, Cierpiatka, Kamień-Kolonia, Korek, Magdalenów;
3. w powiecie kaliskim, w gminie Koźminek, miejscowości: Dębsko, Emilianów (wraz z Zosina), Tymianek, Pietrzyków, Smółki, Ksawerów, Marianów, Złotniki, Nowy Karolew, Gać Kaliska, Stary Karolew, Chodybki, Moskurnia, miasto Koźminek (wraz z Przydziałki, Słowiki, Warwarówka), Stary Nakwasin;
4. w powiecie kaliskim, w gminie Żelazków miejscowość: Dębe, Florentyna, Ilno, Pólko, Skarszew, Skarszewek;
5. w powiecie kaliskim, w gminie Lisków, miejscowość: Trzebienie, Ciepielew.
— w gminie Goszczanów, miejscowości: Sokołów, Sulmów, Wola Tłomakowa
PL-HPAI(P)-2025-00014 W województwie lubuskim,1)w powiecie nowosolskim,—w gminie Nowa Sól, miejscowości: Buczków, Lubięcin, Jeziorna, Jodłów, Dąbrowno, Chełmek, Stany Lipiny;—w gminie Kolsko, miejscowości: Uście, Tatarki, Jesiona, Sławocin, Tyrszeliny, Kolsko, Mesze;—w gminie Otyń, miejscowość Bobrowniki;2)w powiecie zielonogórskim,—w gminie Zabór, miejscowości: Tarnawa, Milsko, Dąbrowa, Zabór;—w gminie Bojadła, miejscowości: Bojadła, Przewóz, Klenica, Siadcza, Bełcze, Pólko Sosnówka;—w gminie Kargowa, miejscowość Karszyn;3)w powiecie wschowskim—w gminie Sława, miejscowości: Ciosaniec, Droniki, Gola, Szreniawa, Lubiatów, Lubogoszcz, Kuźnica Głogowska, Tarnów Jezierny, część miejscowości Sława (część miejscowości położona na południowy zachód od drogi DW 278).W województwie wielkopolskim w powiecie wolsztyńskim:1.w gminie Wolsztyn, miejscowości: Wilcze, Rudno, część miejscowości Świętno na południe od Południowego Kanału Obry. 1) w powiecie nowosolskim,—w gminie Nowa Sól, miejscowości: Buczków, Lubięcin, Jeziorna, Jodłów, Dąbrowno, Chełmek, Stany Lipiny;—w gminie Kolsko, miejscowości: Uście, Tatarki, Jesiona, Sławocin, Tyrszeliny, Kolsko, Mesze;—w gminie Otyń, miejscowość Bobrowniki; — w gminie Nowa Sól, miejscowości: Buczków, Lubięcin, Jeziorna, Jodłów, Dąbrowno, Chełmek, Stany Lipiny; — w gminie Kolsko, miejscowości: Uście, Tatarki, Jesiona, Sławocin, Tyrszeliny, Kolsko, Mesze; — w gminie Otyń, miejscowość Bobrowniki; 2) w powiecie zielonogórskim,—w gminie Zabór, miejscowości: Tarnawa, Milsko, Dąbrowa, Zabór;—w gminie Bojadła, miejscowości: Bojadła, Przewóz, Klenica, Siadcza, Bełcze, Pólko Sosnówka;—w gminie Kargowa, miejscowość Karszyn; — w gminie Zabór, miejscowości: Tarnawa, Milsko, Dąbrowa, Zabór; — w gminie Bojadła, miejscowości: Bojadła, Przewóz, Klenica, Siadcza, Bełcze, Pólko Sosnówka; — w gminie Kargowa, miejscowość Karszyn; 3) w powiecie wschowskim—w gminie Sława, miejscowości: Ciosaniec, Droniki, Gola, Szreniawa, Lubiatów, Lubogoszcz, Kuźnica Głogowska, Tarnów Jezierny, część miejscowości Sława (część miejscowości położona na południowy zachód od drogi DW 278). — w gminie Sława, miejscowości: Ciosaniec, Droniki, Gola, Szreniawa, Lubiatów, Lubogoszcz, Kuźnica Głogowska, Tarnów Jezierny, część miejscowości Sława (część miejscowości położona na południowy zachód od drogi DW 278). 1. w gminie Wolsztyn, miejscowości: Wilcze, Rudno, część miejscowości Świętno na południe od Południowego Kanału Obry. 7.3.2025
1) w powiecie nowosolskim,—w gminie Nowa Sól, miejscowości: Buczków, Lubięcin, Jeziorna, Jodłów, Dąbrowno, Chełmek, Stany Lipiny;—w gminie Kolsko, miejscowości: Uście, Tatarki, Jesiona, Sławocin, Tyrszeliny, Kolsko, Mesze;—w gminie Otyń, miejscowość Bobrowniki; — w gminie Nowa Sól, miejscowości: Buczków, Lubięcin, Jeziorna, Jodłów, Dąbrowno, Chełmek, Stany Lipiny; — w gminie Kolsko, miejscowości: Uście, Tatarki, Jesiona, Sławocin, Tyrszeliny, Kolsko, Mesze; — w gminie Otyń, miejscowość Bobrowniki;
— w gminie Nowa Sól, miejscowości: Buczków, Lubięcin, Jeziorna, Jodłów, Dąbrowno, Chełmek, Stany Lipiny;
— w gminie Kolsko, miejscowości: Uście, Tatarki, Jesiona, Sławocin, Tyrszeliny, Kolsko, Mesze;
— w gminie Otyń, miejscowość Bobrowniki;
2) w powiecie zielonogórskim,—w gminie Zabór, miejscowości: Tarnawa, Milsko, Dąbrowa, Zabór;—w gminie Bojadła, miejscowości: Bojadła, Przewóz, Klenica, Siadcza, Bełcze, Pólko Sosnówka;—w gminie Kargowa, miejscowość Karszyn; — w gminie Zabór, miejscowości: Tarnawa, Milsko, Dąbrowa, Zabór; — w gminie Bojadła, miejscowości: Bojadła, Przewóz, Klenica, Siadcza, Bełcze, Pólko Sosnówka; — w gminie Kargowa, miejscowość Karszyn;
— w gminie Zabór, miejscowości: Tarnawa, Milsko, Dąbrowa, Zabór;
— w gminie Bojadła, miejscowości: Bojadła, Przewóz, Klenica, Siadcza, Bełcze, Pólko Sosnówka;
— w gminie Kargowa, miejscowość Karszyn;
3) w powiecie wschowskim—w gminie Sława, miejscowości: Ciosaniec, Droniki, Gola, Szreniawa, Lubiatów, Lubogoszcz, Kuźnica Głogowska, Tarnów Jezierny, część miejscowości Sława (część miejscowości położona na południowy zachód od drogi DW 278). — w gminie Sława, miejscowości: Ciosaniec, Droniki, Gola, Szreniawa, Lubiatów, Lubogoszcz, Kuźnica Głogowska, Tarnów Jezierny, część miejscowości Sława (część miejscowości położona na południowy zachód od drogi DW 278).
— w gminie Sława, miejscowości: Ciosaniec, Droniki, Gola, Szreniawa, Lubiatów, Lubogoszcz, Kuźnica Głogowska, Tarnów Jezierny, część miejscowości Sława (część miejscowości położona na południowy zachód od drogi DW 278).
1. w gminie Wolsztyn, miejscowości: Wilcze, Rudno, część miejscowości Świętno na południe od Południowego Kanału Obry.
W województwie lubuskim,1)w powiecie nowosolskim, w gminie Kolsko, miejscowości: Konotop, Lipka2)w powiecie zielonogórskim, w gminie Bojadła, miejscowości: Pyrnik Młynkowo, Kartno, Susłów 1) w powiecie nowosolskim, w gminie Kolsko, miejscowości: Konotop, Lipka 2) w powiecie zielonogórskim, w gminie Bojadła, miejscowości: Pyrnik Młynkowo, Kartno, Susłów 27.2.2025-7.3.2025
1) w powiecie nowosolskim, w gminie Kolsko, miejscowości: Konotop, Lipka
2) w powiecie zielonogórskim, w gminie Bojadła, miejscowości: Pyrnik Młynkowo, Kartno, Susłów
PL-HPAI(P)-2025-00016 W województwie wielkopolskim w powiecie kaliskim:1.w gminie Lisków: Budy Liskowskie, Ciepielów, Lisków, Swoboda, Trzebienie;2.w gminie Koźminek: Chodybki, Dębsko, Gać Kaliska, Koźminek, Ksawerów, Marianów, Moskurnia, Nowy Karolew, Oszczeklin, Pietrzyków.W województwie łódzkim w powiecie sieradzkim:1.w gminie Błaszki, miejscowości: obszar wiejski: Adamki, Borysławice, Chabierów, Domaniew, Garbów, Golków, Gorzałów, Kalinowa, Kamienna, Kamienna Kolonia, Kołdów, Kwasków, Lubanów, Maciszewice, Orzeżyn, Skalmierz, Smaszków, Suliszewice, Wójcice oraz miasto Błaszki – obręb 1;2.w gminie Goszczanów, miejscowości: Czerniaków, Gawłowice, Goszczanów, Janówek, Karolina, Kaszew, Lipicze, Poniatów, Poniatówek, Poprężniki, Poradzew, Rzężawy, Sokołów, Strachanów, Sulmów, Wacławów, Wola Tłomakowa, Wroniawy;3.w gminie Warta, miejscowości: Augustynów, Cielce, Czartki, Duszniki, Gać Warcka, Grzybki, Góra, Głaniszew, Kawęczynek, Małków, Mikołajewice, Raczków, Socha, Socha Kolonia, Tomisławice, Ustków, Witów, Wola Zadąbrowska Stara Wieś, Wola Zadąbrowska Nowa Wieś, Zadąbrów Rudunek, Zadąbrów Wiatraki, Zagajew oraz miasto Warta – obręb 1, obręb 16, obręb 2, obręb 3, obręb 4, obręb 5, obręb 6, obręb 7, obręb 8.Zawierające się w promieniu 10 km od współrzędnych GPS: 51.74103/18.46314 1. w gminie Lisków: Budy Liskowskie, Ciepielów, Lisków, Swoboda, Trzebienie; 2. w gminie Koźminek: Chodybki, Dębsko, Gać Kaliska, Koźminek, Ksawerów, Marianów, Moskurnia, Nowy Karolew, Oszczeklin, Pietrzyków. 1. w gminie Błaszki, miejscowości: obszar wiejski: Adamki, Borysławice, Chabierów, Domaniew, Garbów, Golków, Gorzałów, Kalinowa, Kamienna, Kamienna Kolonia, Kołdów, Kwasków, Lubanów, Maciszewice, Orzeżyn, Skalmierz, Smaszków, Suliszewice, Wójcice oraz miasto Błaszki – obręb 1; 2. w gminie Goszczanów, miejscowości: Czerniaków, Gawłowice, Goszczanów, Janówek, Karolina, Kaszew, Lipicze, Poniatów, Poniatówek, Poprężniki, Poradzew, Rzężawy, Sokołów, Strachanów, Sulmów, Wacławów, Wola Tłomakowa, Wroniawy; 3. w gminie Warta, miejscowości: Augustynów, Cielce, Czartki, Duszniki, Gać Warcka, Grzybki, Góra, Głaniszew, Kawęczynek, Małków, Mikołajewice, Raczków, Socha, Socha Kolonia, Tomisławice, Ustków, Witów, Wola Zadąbrowska Stara Wieś, Wola Zadąbrowska Nowa Wieś, Zadąbrów Rudunek, Zadąbrów Wiatraki, Zagajew oraz miasto Warta – obręb 1, obręb 16, obręb 2, obręb 3, obręb 4, obręb 5, obręb 6, obręb 7, obręb 8. 10.3.2025
1. w gminie Lisków: Budy Liskowskie, Ciepielów, Lisków, Swoboda, Trzebienie;
2. w gminie Koźminek: Chodybki, Dębsko, Gać Kaliska, Koźminek, Ksawerów, Marianów, Moskurnia, Nowy Karolew, Oszczeklin, Pietrzyków.
1. w gminie Błaszki, miejscowości: obszar wiejski: Adamki, Borysławice, Chabierów, Domaniew, Garbów, Golków, Gorzałów, Kalinowa, Kamienna, Kamienna Kolonia, Kołdów, Kwasków, Lubanów, Maciszewice, Orzeżyn, Skalmierz, Smaszków, Suliszewice, Wójcice oraz miasto Błaszki – obręb 1;
2. w gminie Goszczanów, miejscowości: Czerniaków, Gawłowice, Goszczanów, Janówek, Karolina, Kaszew, Lipicze, Poniatów, Poniatówek, Poprężniki, Poradzew, Rzężawy, Sokołów, Strachanów, Sulmów, Wacławów, Wola Tłomakowa, Wroniawy;
3. w gminie Warta, miejscowości: Augustynów, Cielce, Czartki, Duszniki, Gać Warcka, Grzybki, Góra, Głaniszew, Kawęczynek, Małków, Mikołajewice, Raczków, Socha, Socha Kolonia, Tomisławice, Ustków, Witów, Wola Zadąbrowska Stara Wieś, Wola Zadąbrowska Nowa Wieś, Zadąbrów Rudunek, Zadąbrów Wiatraki, Zagajew oraz miasto Warta – obręb 1, obręb 16, obręb 2, obręb 3, obręb 4, obręb 5, obręb 6, obręb 7, obręb 8.
W województwie wielkopolskim w powiecie kaliskim:—w gminie Szczytniki: Mroczki Wielkie.W województwie łódzkim w powiecie sieradzkim:—w gminie Goszczanów, miejscowości: Chlewo, Chwalęcice, Stojanów, Sulmówek, Świnice Kaliskie, Waliszewice, Wilkszyce;—w gminie Błaszki, miejscowości: Kobylniki, Korzenica, Morawki, Nacesławice, Sędzimirowice—w gminie Warta, miejscowości: Krąków, Zielęcin.Zawierające się w promieniu 3 km od współrzędnych GPS: 51.74103/18.46314 — w gminie Szczytniki: Mroczki Wielkie. — w gminie Goszczanów, miejscowości: Chlewo, Chwalęcice, Stojanów, Sulmówek, Świnice Kaliskie, Waliszewice, Wilkszyce; — w gminie Błaszki, miejscowości: Kobylniki, Korzenica, Morawki, Nacesławice, Sędzimirowice — w gminie Warta, miejscowości: Krąków, Zielęcin. 2.3.2025-10.3.2025
— w gminie Szczytniki: Mroczki Wielkie.
— w gminie Goszczanów, miejscowości: Chlewo, Chwalęcice, Stojanów, Sulmówek, Świnice Kaliskie, Waliszewice, Wilkszyce;
— w gminie Błaszki, miejscowości: Kobylniki, Korzenica, Morawki, Nacesławice, Sędzimirowice
— w gminie Warta, miejscowości: Krąków, Zielęcin.
— powiat: sieradzki
— woj łódzkie:
1) W powiecie żuromińskima)w gminie Bieżuń, miejscowości: Adamowo, Bieżuń część miejscowości ograniczonej drogą krajową nr 541, ulicą Lawendową oraz ulicą Płocką, Dąbrówki z wyjątkiem części miejscowości na wschód od drogi krajowej 561 oraz na północ od odnogi rzeki Wkra, Gołuszyn z wyjątkiem części miejscowości na południowy zachód od rzeki Dopływ spod Stawiszyna, Mak, Małocin, Pełki, Pozga, Sławęcin z wyjątkiem części miejscowości na zachód od rzeki Dopływ spod Stawiszyna, Stanisławowo, Stawiszyn-Zwalewo, Trzaski, Wieluń-Zalesie, Wilewo, Władysławowo, Zgliczyn Pobodzy,b)w gminie Siemiątkowo, miejscowości: Antoniewo, Dzieczewo, Nowa Wieś, Nowopole, Rostowa, Siemiątkowo, Siciarz, Siemiątkowo-Rogale, Sokołowy Kąt, Suwaki,c)w gminie Kuczbork-Osada: Chodubka część miejscowości na południe od ul. Szreńskiej, Olszewko, Zielona.d)w gminie Lutocin, miejscowości: Chromakowo, Dębówka, Elżbiecin, Felcyn, Jonne, Lutocin za wyjątkiem części miejscowości ograniczonej ul. Sierpecką i drogą gminną nr 628, Mojnowo, Obręb, Parlin, Przeradz Mały, Przeradz Nowy, Przeradz Wielki, Seroki, Swojęcin, Siemcichy, Zimolza,e)w gminie Lubowidz, miejscowości: Bądzyn,f)w gminie Żuromin, miejscowości: Brudnice, Będzymin, Cierpigórz, część miejscowości Chamsk ograniczonej na zachód drogą krajową nr 541, na południe ul. Wyzwolenia oraz na wschód ulicą Mazowiecką aż do granicy miejscowości, Dąbrowa, Dębsk, Franciszkowo część miejscowości na północ od ul. Ponad Lasem , Kosewo, Kliczewo Małe, Kliczewo Duże, Kruszewo, Nowe Nadratowo, Olszewo, Poniatowo, Raczyny, Rozwozin, Rzężawy Sadowo, Wiadrowo, Wólka Kliczewska, Stare Nadratowo,g)w gminie Żuromin: miasto Żuromin; a) w gminie Bieżuń, miejscowości: Adamowo, Bieżuń część miejscowości ograniczonej drogą krajową nr 541, ulicą Lawendową oraz ulicą Płocką, Dąbrówki z wyjątkiem części miejscowości na wschód od drogi krajowej 561 oraz na północ od odnogi rzeki Wkra, Gołuszyn z wyjątkiem części miejscowości na południowy zachód od rzeki Dopływ spod Stawiszyna, Mak, Małocin, Pełki, Pozga, Sławęcin z wyjątkiem części miejscowości na zachód od rzeki Dopływ spod Stawiszyna, Stanisławowo, Stawiszyn-Zwalewo, Trzaski, Wieluń-Zalesie, Wilewo, Władysławowo, Zgliczyn Pobodzy, b) w gminie Siemiątkowo, miejscowości: Antoniewo, Dzieczewo, Nowa Wieś, Nowopole, Rostowa, Siemiątkowo, Siciarz, Siemiątkowo-Rogale, Sokołowy Kąt, Suwaki, c) w gminie Kuczbork-Osada: Chodubka część miejscowości na południe od ul. Szreńskiej, Olszewko, Zielona. d) w gminie Lutocin, miejscowości: Chromakowo, Dębówka, Elżbiecin, Felcyn, Jonne, Lutocin za wyjątkiem części miejscowości ograniczonej ul. Sierpecką i drogą gminną nr 628, Mojnowo, Obręb, Parlin, Przeradz Mały, Przeradz Nowy, Przeradz Wielki, Seroki, Swojęcin, Siemcichy, Zimolza, e) w gminie Lubowidz, miejscowości: Bądzyn, f) w gminie Żuromin, miejscowości: Brudnice, Będzymin, Cierpigórz, część miejscowości Chamsk ograniczonej na zachód drogą krajową nr 541, na południe ul. Wyzwolenia oraz na wschód ulicą Mazowiecką aż do granicy miejscowości, Dąbrowa, Dębsk, Franciszkowo część miejscowości na północ od ul. Ponad Lasem , Kosewo, Kliczewo Małe, Kliczewo Duże, Kruszewo, Nowe Nadratowo, Olszewo, Poniatowo, Raczyny, Rozwozin, Rzężawy Sadowo, Wiadrowo, Wólka Kliczewska, Stare Nadratowo, g) w gminie Żuromin: miasto Żuromin;
a) w gminie Bieżuń, miejscowości: Adamowo, Bieżuń część miejscowości ograniczonej drogą krajową nr 541, ulicą Lawendową oraz ulicą Płocką, Dąbrówki z wyjątkiem części miejscowości na wschód od drogi krajowej 561 oraz na północ od odnogi rzeki Wkra, Gołuszyn z wyjątkiem części miejscowości na południowy zachód od rzeki Dopływ spod Stawiszyna, Mak, Małocin, Pełki, Pozga, Sławęcin z wyjątkiem części miejscowości na zachód od rzeki Dopływ spod Stawiszyna, Stanisławowo, Stawiszyn-Zwalewo, Trzaski, Wieluń-Zalesie, Wilewo, Władysławowo, Zgliczyn Pobodzy,
b) w gminie Siemiątkowo, miejscowości: Antoniewo, Dzieczewo, Nowa Wieś, Nowopole, Rostowa, Siemiątkowo, Siciarz, Siemiątkowo-Rogale, Sokołowy Kąt, Suwaki,
c) w gminie Kuczbork-Osada: Chodubka część miejscowości na południe od ul. Szreńskiej, Olszewko, Zielona.
d) w gminie Lutocin, miejscowości: Chromakowo, Dębówka, Elżbiecin, Felcyn, Jonne, Lutocin za wyjątkiem części miejscowości ograniczonej ul. Sierpecką i drogą gminną nr 628, Mojnowo, Obręb, Parlin, Przeradz Mały, Przeradz Nowy, Przeradz Wielki, Seroki, Swojęcin, Siemcichy, Zimolza,
e) w gminie Lubowidz, miejscowości: Bądzyn,
f) w gminie Żuromin, miejscowości: Brudnice, Będzymin, Cierpigórz, część miejscowości Chamsk ograniczonej na zachód drogą krajową nr 541, na południe ul. Wyzwolenia oraz na wschód ulicą Mazowiecką aż do granicy miejscowości, Dąbrowa, Dębsk, Franciszkowo część miejscowości na północ od ul. Ponad Lasem , Kosewo, Kliczewo Małe, Kliczewo Duże, Kruszewo, Nowe Nadratowo, Olszewo, Poniatowo, Raczyny, Rozwozin, Rzężawy Sadowo, Wiadrowo, Wólka Kliczewska, Stare Nadratowo,
g) w gminie Żuromin: miasto Żuromin;
a) w gminie Bieżuń, miejscowości: Adamowo, Bieżuń część miejscowości ograniczonej drogą krajową nr 541, ulicą Lawendową oraz ulicą Płocką, Dąbrówki z wyjątkiem części miejscowości na wschód od drogi krajowej 561 oraz na północ od odnogi rzeki Wkra, Gołuszyn z wyjątkiem części miejscowości na południowy zachód od rzeki Dopływ spod Stawiszyna, Mak, Małocin, Pełki, Pozga, Sławęcin z wyjątkiem części miejscowości na zachód od rzeki Dopływ spod Stawiszyna, Stanisławowo, Stawiszyn-Zwalewo, Trzaski, Wieluń-Zalesie, Wilewo, Władysławowo, Zgliczyn Pobodzy,
b) w gminie Siemiątkowo, miejscowości: Antoniewo, Dzieczewo, Nowa Wieś, Nowopole, Rostowa, Siemiątkowo, Siciarz, Siemiątkowo-Rogale, Sokołowy Kąt, Suwaki,
c) w gminie Kuczbork-Osada: Chodubka część miejscowości na południe od ul. Szreńskiej, Olszewko, Zielona.
d) w gminie Lutocin, miejscowości: Chromakowo, Dębówka, Elżbiecin, Felcyn, Jonne, Lutocin za wyjątkiem części miejscowości ograniczonej ul. Sierpecką i drogą gminną nr 628, Mojnowo, Obręb, Parlin, Przeradz Mały, Przeradz Nowy, Przeradz Wielki, Seroki, Swojęcin, Siemcichy, Zimolza,
e) w gminie Lubowidz, miejscowości: Bądzyn,
f) w gminie Żuromin, miejscowości: Brudnice, Będzymin, Cierpigórz, część miejscowości Chamsk ograniczonej na zachód drogą krajową nr 541, na południe ul. Wyzwolenia oraz na wschód ulicą Mazowiecką aż do granicy miejscowości, Dąbrowa, Dębsk, Franciszkowo część miejscowości na północ od ul. Ponad Lasem , Kosewo, Kliczewo Małe, Kliczewo Duże, Kruszewo, Nowe Nadratowo, Olszewo, Poniatowo, Raczyny, Rozwozin, Rzężawy Sadowo, Wiadrowo, Wólka Kliczewska, Stare Nadratowo,
g) w gminie Żuromin: miasto Żuromin;
2) w powiecie sierpeckim:a)w gminie Zawidz, miejscowości: Jaworowo-Kolonia, Jaworowo-Kłódź, Jaworowo-Lipa, Kosemin,b)w gminie Rościszewo, miejscowości: Lipniki na północny wschód od rzeki Dopływ spod Władysławowa, Ostrów, Polik, Rumunki-Chwały, Rzeszotary- Chwały, Rzeszotary, Rumunki-Stara Wieś, Rzeszotary-Zawady, Września; a) w gminie Zawidz, miejscowości: Jaworowo-Kolonia, Jaworowo-Kłódź, Jaworowo-Lipa, Kosemin, b) w gminie Rościszewo, miejscowości: Lipniki na północny wschód od rzeki Dopływ spod Władysławowa, Ostrów, Polik, Rumunki-Chwały, Rzeszotary- Chwały, Rzeszotary, Rumunki-Stara Wieś, Rzeszotary-Zawady, Września;
a) w gminie Zawidz, miejscowości: Jaworowo-Kolonia, Jaworowo-Kłódź, Jaworowo-Lipa, Kosemin,
b) w gminie Rościszewo, miejscowości: Lipniki na północny wschód od rzeki Dopływ spod Władysławowa, Ostrów, Polik, Rumunki-Chwały, Rzeszotary- Chwały, Rzeszotary, Rumunki-Stara Wieś, Rzeszotary-Zawady, Września;
a) w gminie Zawidz, miejscowości: Jaworowo-Kolonia, Jaworowo-Kłódź, Jaworowo-Lipa, Kosemin,
b) w gminie Rościszewo, miejscowości: Lipniki na północny wschód od rzeki Dopływ spod Władysławowa, Ostrów, Polik, Rumunki-Chwały, Rzeszotary- Chwały, Rzeszotary, Rumunki-Stara Wieś, Rzeszotary-Zawady, Września;
3) w powiecie mławskim:a)w gminie Radzanów, miejscowości: Bojanowo, Cegielnia Ratowska na zachód od drogi pomiędzy miejscowościami Bielawy i Ratowo, część miejscowości Radzanów ograniczonej od wschodu rzeką Wkrą do ulicy Mławskiej, następnie ulicą Mławską do skrzyżowania z ulicą Raciążską oraz wzdłuż ulicy Raciążskiej aż do granicy miejscowości, Ratowo, Zgliczyn- Glinki, Zgliczyn Witowy,b)w gminie Szreńsk, miejscowości: Pączkowo, Sławkowo, Ługi, Miłotki. a) w gminie Radzanów, miejscowości: Bojanowo, Cegielnia Ratowska na zachód od drogi pomiędzy miejscowościami Bielawy i Ratowo, część miejscowości Radzanów ograniczonej od wschodu rzeką Wkrą do ulicy Mławskiej, następnie ulicą Mławską do skrzyżowania z ulicą Raciążską oraz wzdłuż ulicy Raciążskiej aż do granicy miejscowości, Ratowo, Zgliczyn- Glinki, Zgliczyn Witowy, b) w gminie Szreńsk, miejscowości: Pączkowo, Sławkowo, Ługi, Miłotki.
a) w gminie Radzanów, miejscowości: Bojanowo, Cegielnia Ratowska na zachód od drogi pomiędzy miejscowościami Bielawy i Ratowo, część miejscowości Radzanów ograniczonej od wschodu rzeką Wkrą do ulicy Mławskiej, następnie ulicą Mławską do skrzyżowania z ulicą Raciążską oraz wzdłuż ulicy Raciążskiej aż do granicy miejscowości, Ratowo, Zgliczyn- Glinki, Zgliczyn Witowy,
b) w gminie Szreńsk, miejscowości: Pączkowo, Sławkowo, Ługi, Miłotki.
a) w gminie Radzanów, miejscowości: Bojanowo, Cegielnia Ratowska na zachód od drogi pomiędzy miejscowościami Bielawy i Ratowo, część miejscowości Radzanów ograniczonej od wschodu rzeką Wkrą do ulicy Mławskiej, następnie ulicą Mławską do skrzyżowania z ulicą Raciążską oraz wzdłuż ulicy Raciążskiej aż do granicy miejscowości, Ratowo, Zgliczyn- Glinki, Zgliczyn Witowy,
b) w gminie Szreńsk, miejscowości: Pączkowo, Sławkowo, Ługi, Miłotki.
a) w gminie Bieżuń, miejscowości: Bielawy Gołuskie, Dąbrówki na wschód od drogi krajowej 561 oraz na północ od odnogi rzeki Wkra, Dźwierzno, Gołuszyn na południowy zachód od rzeki Dopływ spod Stawiszyna, Karniszyn, Karniszyn-Parcele, Kobyla Łąka, Kocewo, Myślin, Sadłowo, Sadłowo-Parcele, Stawiszyn-Łaziska, Sławęcin na zachód od rzeki Dopływ spod Stawiszyna oraz miasto Bieżuń z wyjątkiem części miejscowości ograniczonej drogą krajową nr 541, ulicą Lawendową oraz ulicą Płocką, Strzeszewo;
b) w gminie Żuromin, miejscowości: Chamsk z wyjątkiem części miejscowości ograniczonej na zachód drogą krajową nr 541, na południe ul. Wyzwolenia oraz na wschód ulicą Mazowiecką aż do granicy miejscowości, Franciszkowo za wyjątkiem części miejscowości na północ od ul. Ponad Lasem, Młudzyn.
1) Boratyn, Chłopice, Dobkowice, Jankowice, Lutków, Łowce, Zamiechów w gminie Chłopice;
2) Jarosław w gminie miejskiej Jarosław;
3) Makowisko, Morawsko i Pełkinie w gminie wiejskiej Jarosław;
4) Bobrówka, Charytany, Korzenica, Laszki, Wietlin Pierwszy, Wietlin Trzeci, Wysocko w gminie Laszki;
5) Kidałowice, Maleniska, Pawłosiów, Tywonia, Widna Góra, Wierzbna w gminie Pawłosiów;
6) Radymno w gminie miejskiej Radymno;
7) Duńkowice, Łazy, Michałówka, Ostrów, Skołoszów, Święte, Zamojsce w gminie wiejskiej Radymno;
8) Cetula, Piwoda, Radawa, Ryszkowa Wola, Szówsko, Wiązownica, Zapałów w gminie Wiązownica.
1) Surochów, Koniaczów, Munina, Sobiecin, Tuczempy, Zgoda w gminie wiejskiej Jarosław;
2) Wietlin w gminie Laszki;
3) Ostrów w gminie Radymno.
1. powiat giżycki:a.gmina Giżycko: Bogaczewo, Guty, Kamionki, Kozin, Szczybały Giżyckie, Wilkaski, Wilkasy, Wronka, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Antonowo na zachód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowość Sztynort Mały i Rondo im. św. Jana Pawła II w Giżycku, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Bogacko na północ od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Kronowo i Wrony, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Wrony na wschód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Kamionki i Jagodne Małe;b.gmina Miłki: w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Jagodne Wielkie na północ od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Prażmowo i Grajwo;c.gmina Ryn: Knis, miasto Ryn, Orło, Prażmowo, Skop, Tros, Rudówka, Ryn, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Jeziorko na południe od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Orło i Szczybały Giżyckie, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Kronowo na północ od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Bałowo i Kamionki, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Krzyżany na wschód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Rybical i Koczarki, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Ławki na północ od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Rybical i Prażmowo, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Rybical na północ od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Słabowo i Ławki, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Wejdyki na wschód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Rybical i Krzyżany;d.w granicach administracyjnych miasta Giżycko na zachód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Antonowo i Kleszczewo-Osada. a. gmina Giżycko: Bogaczewo, Guty, Kamionki, Kozin, Szczybały Giżyckie, Wilkaski, Wilkasy, Wronka, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Antonowo na zachód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowość Sztynort Mały i Rondo im. św. Jana Pawła II w Giżycku, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Bogacko na północ od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Kronowo i Wrony, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Wrony na wschód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Kamionki i Jagodne Małe; b. gmina Miłki: w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Jagodne Wielkie na północ od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Prażmowo i Grajwo; c. gmina Ryn: Knis, miasto Ryn, Orło, Prażmowo, Skop, Tros, Rudówka, Ryn, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Jeziorko na południe od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Orło i Szczybały Giżyckie, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Kronowo na północ od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Bałowo i Kamionki, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Krzyżany na wschód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Rybical i Koczarki, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Ławki na północ od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Rybical i Prażmowo, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Rybical na północ od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Słabowo i Ławki, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Wejdyki na wschód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Rybical i Krzyżany; d. w granicach administracyjnych miasta Giżycko na zachód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Antonowo i Kleszczewo-Osada.
a. gmina Giżycko: Bogaczewo, Guty, Kamionki, Kozin, Szczybały Giżyckie, Wilkaski, Wilkasy, Wronka, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Antonowo na zachód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowość Sztynort Mały i Rondo im. św. Jana Pawła II w Giżycku, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Bogacko na północ od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Kronowo i Wrony, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Wrony na wschód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Kamionki i Jagodne Małe;
b. gmina Miłki: w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Jagodne Wielkie na północ od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Prażmowo i Grajwo;
c. gmina Ryn: Knis, miasto Ryn, Orło, Prażmowo, Skop, Tros, Rudówka, Ryn, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Jeziorko na południe od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Orło i Szczybały Giżyckie, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Kronowo na północ od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Bałowo i Kamionki, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Krzyżany na wschód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Rybical i Koczarki, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Ławki na północ od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Rybical i Prażmowo, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Rybical na północ od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Słabowo i Ławki, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Wejdyki na wschód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Rybical i Krzyżany;
d. w granicach administracyjnych miasta Giżycko na zachód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Antonowo i Kleszczewo-Osada.
a. gmina Giżycko: Bogaczewo, Guty, Kamionki, Kozin, Szczybały Giżyckie, Wilkaski, Wilkasy, Wronka, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Antonowo na zachód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowość Sztynort Mały i Rondo im. św. Jana Pawła II w Giżycku, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Bogacko na północ od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Kronowo i Wrony, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Wrony na wschód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Kamionki i Jagodne Małe;
b. gmina Miłki: w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Jagodne Wielkie na północ od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Prażmowo i Grajwo;
c. gmina Ryn: Knis, miasto Ryn, Orło, Prażmowo, Skop, Tros, Rudówka, Ryn, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Jeziorko na południe od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Orło i Szczybały Giżyckie, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Kronowo na północ od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Bałowo i Kamionki, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Krzyżany na wschód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Rybical i Koczarki, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Ławki na północ od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Rybical i Prażmowo, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Rybical na północ od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Słabowo i Ławki, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Wejdyki na wschód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Rybical i Krzyżany;
d. w granicach administracyjnych miasta Giżycko na zachód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Antonowo i Kleszczewo-Osada.
2. powiat kętrzyński:a.gmina Kętrzyn: Bałowo, Martiany, Osewo, Parcz, Pożarki, Salpik, Sykstyny, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Czerniki na wschód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Godzikowo i Jankowo, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Koczarki na wschód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Krzyżany i Nakomiady, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Kwiedzina na wschód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Godzikowo i Jankowo, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Nakomiady na wschód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Koczarki i Kwiedzina, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Wajsznory na wschód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Koczarki i Kwiedzina. a. gmina Kętrzyn: Bałowo, Martiany, Osewo, Parcz, Pożarki, Salpik, Sykstyny, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Czerniki na wschód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Godzikowo i Jankowo, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Koczarki na wschód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Krzyżany i Nakomiady, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Kwiedzina na wschód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Godzikowo i Jankowo, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Nakomiady na wschód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Koczarki i Kwiedzina, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Wajsznory na wschód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Koczarki i Kwiedzina.
a. gmina Kętrzyn: Bałowo, Martiany, Osewo, Parcz, Pożarki, Salpik, Sykstyny, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Czerniki na wschód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Godzikowo i Jankowo, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Koczarki na wschód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Krzyżany i Nakomiady, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Kwiedzina na wschód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Godzikowo i Jankowo, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Nakomiady na wschód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Koczarki i Kwiedzina, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Wajsznory na wschód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Koczarki i Kwiedzina.
a. gmina Kętrzyn: Bałowo, Martiany, Osewo, Parcz, Pożarki, Salpik, Sykstyny, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Czerniki na wschód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Godzikowo i Jankowo, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Koczarki na wschód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Krzyżany i Nakomiady, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Kwiedzina na wschód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Godzikowo i Jankowo, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Nakomiady na wschód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Koczarki i Kwiedzina, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Wajsznory na wschód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Koczarki i Kwiedzina.
3. powiat węgorzewski:a.gmina Węgorzewo: w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Pilwa na południe od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Jankowo i Harsz. a. gmina Węgorzewo: w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Pilwa na południe od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Jankowo i Harsz.
a. gmina Węgorzewo: w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Pilwa na południe od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Jankowo i Harsz.
a. gmina Węgorzewo: w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Pilwa na południe od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Jankowo i Harsz.
1. powiat giżycki:a.gmina Giżycko: Sterławki Małe, Sterławki Średnie, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Bogacko na południe od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Kronowo i Wrony, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Wrony na zachód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Kamionki i Jagodne Małe;b.gmina Ryn: Sterławki Wielkie, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Jeziorko na północ od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Orło i Szczybały Giżyckie, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Kronowo na południe od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Bałowo i Kamionki. a. gmina Giżycko: Sterławki Małe, Sterławki Średnie, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Bogacko na południe od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Kronowo i Wrony, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Wrony na zachód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Kamionki i Jagodne Małe; b. gmina Ryn: Sterławki Wielkie, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Jeziorko na północ od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Orło i Szczybały Giżyckie, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Kronowo na południe od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Bałowo i Kamionki.
a. gmina Giżycko: Sterławki Małe, Sterławki Średnie, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Bogacko na południe od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Kronowo i Wrony, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Wrony na zachód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Kamionki i Jagodne Małe;
b. gmina Ryn: Sterławki Wielkie, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Jeziorko na północ od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Orło i Szczybały Giżyckie, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Kronowo na południe od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Bałowo i Kamionki.
a. gmina Giżycko: Sterławki Małe, Sterławki Średnie, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Bogacko na południe od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Kronowo i Wrony, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Wrony na zachód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Kamionki i Jagodne Małe;
b. gmina Ryn: Sterławki Wielkie, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Jeziorko na północ od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Orło i Szczybały Giżyckie, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Kronowo na południe od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Bałowo i Kamionki.
1. Część gminy Osina w powiecie goleniowskim
2. Cześć gminy Nowogard w powiecie goleniowskim
3. Część gminy Maszewo w powiecie goleniowskim
4. Część gminy Goleniów w powiecie goleniowskim
5. Część gminy Dobra w powiecie łobeskim
1. Część gminy Osina w powiecie goleniowskim,
2. Część gminy Nowogard w powiecie goleniowskim
3. Część gminy Maszewo w powiecie goleniowskim
— powiat kutnowski;
— powiat kutnowski;
— powiat kutnowski;
— powiat kutnowski;
— powiat kutnowski;
— powiat kutnowski;
— powiat kutnowski;
— powiat łęczycki;
— woj łódzkie :
— powiat kutnowski, gmina Kutno: Gołębiewek Nowy, Gołębiewek Stary, Krzesin, Wroczyny, Ryków, Krzesin – Parcela, Krzesinówek, Adamów, Adamowice od ul. Krośniewickiej 33 w kierunku miejscowości Skłóty, Podczachy, Franki Wroczyńskie;
— powiat kutnowski, gmina Nowe Ostrowy: Grochów, Wołodrza, Grochówek, Kały – Towarzystwo, Perna;
— powiat kutnowski, gmina Krośniewice: Nowe, Skłóty, Szubina, Szubsk Duży, Witów, Szubsk – Towarzystwo, Cygany, Pomarzany od nr 36 w kierunku miejscowości Szubina, Pawlikowice od nr 22 w kierunku miejscowości Nowe, Iwiczna od nr 29 w kierunku miejscowości Skłóty
1. powiat iławski:a.gmina Iława: Mózgowo, Zazdrość, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Gałdowo na zachód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Gulb i Krzywiec, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Gulb na zachód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Szwarcenowo i Gałdowo.b.gmina Kisielice: Biskupiczki, Butowo, Galinowo, Jędrychowo, Klimy, Łęgowo, Nowy Folwark, Pławty Wielkie, Stary Folwark, Trupel, Wola, w granicach administracyjnych miasta Kisielice na północ od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Limża i Wola, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Limża na północ od drogi krajowej nr 16, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Łodygowo na północ od drogi krajowej nr 16, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Ogrodzieniec na północ od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Trumieje i Trupel, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Sobiewola na północ od drogi krajowej nr 16.c.gmina Susz: w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Wądoły na południe od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Grodziec i Krzywiec. a. gmina Iława: Mózgowo, Zazdrość, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Gałdowo na zachód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Gulb i Krzywiec, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Gulb na zachód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Szwarcenowo i Gałdowo. b. gmina Kisielice: Biskupiczki, Butowo, Galinowo, Jędrychowo, Klimy, Łęgowo, Nowy Folwark, Pławty Wielkie, Stary Folwark, Trupel, Wola, w granicach administracyjnych miasta Kisielice na północ od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Limża i Wola, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Limża na północ od drogi krajowej nr 16, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Łodygowo na północ od drogi krajowej nr 16, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Ogrodzieniec na północ od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Trumieje i Trupel, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Sobiewola na północ od drogi krajowej nr 16. c. gmina Susz: w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Wądoły na południe od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Grodziec i Krzywiec.
a. gmina Iława: Mózgowo, Zazdrość, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Gałdowo na zachód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Gulb i Krzywiec, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Gulb na zachód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Szwarcenowo i Gałdowo.
b. gmina Kisielice: Biskupiczki, Butowo, Galinowo, Jędrychowo, Klimy, Łęgowo, Nowy Folwark, Pławty Wielkie, Stary Folwark, Trupel, Wola, w granicach administracyjnych miasta Kisielice na północ od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Limża i Wola, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Limża na północ od drogi krajowej nr 16, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Łodygowo na północ od drogi krajowej nr 16, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Ogrodzieniec na północ od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Trumieje i Trupel, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Sobiewola na północ od drogi krajowej nr 16.
c. gmina Susz: w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Wądoły na południe od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Grodziec i Krzywiec.
a. gmina Iława: Mózgowo, Zazdrość, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Gałdowo na zachód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Gulb i Krzywiec, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Gulb na zachód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Szwarcenowo i Gałdowo.
b. gmina Kisielice: Biskupiczki, Butowo, Galinowo, Jędrychowo, Klimy, Łęgowo, Nowy Folwark, Pławty Wielkie, Stary Folwark, Trupel, Wola, w granicach administracyjnych miasta Kisielice na północ od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Limża i Wola, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Limża na północ od drogi krajowej nr 16, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Łodygowo na północ od drogi krajowej nr 16, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Ogrodzieniec na północ od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Trumieje i Trupel, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Sobiewola na północ od drogi krajowej nr 16.
c. gmina Susz: w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Wądoły na południe od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Grodziec i Krzywiec.
2. powiat nowomiejskia.gmina Biskupiec: Biskupiec, Fitowo, Osówko, Piotrowice, Podlasek, Podlasek Mały, Sędzice, Słupnica, Sumin, Wielka Tymawa, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Czachówki na zachód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Fitowo i Wielka Wólka, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Lipinki na północ od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Mierzyn i Sędzice, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Szwarcenowo na zachód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Czachówki i Gulb. a. gmina Biskupiec: Biskupiec, Fitowo, Osówko, Piotrowice, Podlasek, Podlasek Mały, Sędzice, Słupnica, Sumin, Wielka Tymawa, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Czachówki na zachód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Fitowo i Wielka Wólka, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Lipinki na północ od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Mierzyn i Sędzice, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Szwarcenowo na zachód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Czachówki i Gulb.
a. gmina Biskupiec: Biskupiec, Fitowo, Osówko, Piotrowice, Podlasek, Podlasek Mały, Sędzice, Słupnica, Sumin, Wielka Tymawa, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Czachówki na zachód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Fitowo i Wielka Wólka, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Lipinki na północ od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Mierzyn i Sędzice, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Szwarcenowo na zachód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Czachówki i Gulb.
a. gmina Biskupiec: Biskupiec, Fitowo, Osówko, Piotrowice, Podlasek, Podlasek Mały, Sędzice, Słupnica, Sumin, Wielka Tymawa, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Czachówki na zachód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Fitowo i Wielka Wólka, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Lipinki na północ od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Mierzyn i Sędzice, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Szwarcenowo na zachód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Czachówki i Gulb.
1. powiat grudziądzki:a.gmina Łasin: Zawda, Szynwałd, Strzelce, Huta Strzelce, Nowe Jankowice, Jankowice, Gordanowo, Zawdzka Wola, Kozłowo, Plesewo Święte, Szonowo Szlacheckie, Goczałki, Łasin Wybudowanieb.gmina Świecie nad Osą: Partęczyny a. gmina Łasin: Zawda, Szynwałd, Strzelce, Huta Strzelce, Nowe Jankowice, Jankowice, Gordanowo, Zawdzka Wola, Kozłowo, Plesewo Święte, Szonowo Szlacheckie, Goczałki, Łasin Wybudowanie b. gmina Świecie nad Osą: Partęczyny
a. gmina Łasin: Zawda, Szynwałd, Strzelce, Huta Strzelce, Nowe Jankowice, Jankowice, Gordanowo, Zawdzka Wola, Kozłowo, Plesewo Święte, Szonowo Szlacheckie, Goczałki, Łasin Wybudowanie
b. gmina Świecie nad Osą: Partęczyny
a. gmina Łasin: Zawda, Szynwałd, Strzelce, Huta Strzelce, Nowe Jankowice, Jankowice, Gordanowo, Zawdzka Wola, Kozłowo, Plesewo Święte, Szonowo Szlacheckie, Goczałki, Łasin Wybudowanie
b. gmina Świecie nad Osą: Partęczyny
1. powiat kwidzyński:a.gmina Prabuty: Grodziecb.gmina Gardeja: Wracławek, Trumieje, Wilkowo, Pawłowo a. gmina Prabuty: Grodziec b. gmina Gardeja: Wracławek, Trumieje, Wilkowo, Pawłowo
a. gmina Prabuty: Grodziec
b. gmina Gardeja: Wracławek, Trumieje, Wilkowo, Pawłowo
a. gmina Prabuty: Grodziec
b. gmina Gardeja: Wracławek, Trumieje, Wilkowo, Pawłowo
1. powiat iławski:a.gmina Kisielice: Byliny, Goryń, Kantowo, Krzywka, Wałdowo, w granicach administracyjnych miasta Kisielice na południe od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Limża i Wola, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Limża na południe od drogi krajowej nr 16, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Łodygowo na południe od drogi krajowej nr 16, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Ogrodzieniec na południe od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Trumieje i Trupel, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Sobiewola na południe od drogi krajowej nr 16. a. gmina Kisielice: Byliny, Goryń, Kantowo, Krzywka, Wałdowo, w granicach administracyjnych miasta Kisielice na południe od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Limża i Wola, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Limża na południe od drogi krajowej nr 16, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Łodygowo na południe od drogi krajowej nr 16, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Ogrodzieniec na południe od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Trumieje i Trupel, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Sobiewola na południe od drogi krajowej nr 16.
a. gmina Kisielice: Byliny, Goryń, Kantowo, Krzywka, Wałdowo, w granicach administracyjnych miasta Kisielice na południe od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Limża i Wola, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Limża na południe od drogi krajowej nr 16, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Łodygowo na południe od drogi krajowej nr 16, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Ogrodzieniec na południe od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Trumieje i Trupel, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Sobiewola na południe od drogi krajowej nr 16.
a. gmina Kisielice: Byliny, Goryń, Kantowo, Krzywka, Wałdowo, w granicach administracyjnych miasta Kisielice na południe od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Limża i Wola, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Limża na południe od drogi krajowej nr 16, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Łodygowo na południe od drogi krajowej nr 16, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Ogrodzieniec na południe od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Trumieje i Trupel, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Sobiewola na południe od drogi krajowej nr 16.
1. powiat giżycki:a.gmina Giżycko: Bogacko, Grajwo, Guty, Kamionki, Kąp, Kożuchy Wielkie, Pieczonki, Wrony, Sołdany, Sulimy, Szczybały Giżyckie, Upałty Małe, Wilkaski, Wilkasy, Wronka, Wrony, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Bogaczewo na północ od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Rydzewo i Bałowo, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Kruklin na zachód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Brożówka i Staświny, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Spytkowo na wschód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Świdry i Kożuchy Wielkie, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Sterławki Małe na wschód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Skop i Skrzypy;b.gmina Miłki: w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Kleszczewo na północ od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Kozin i Ruda, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Rydzewo na północ od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Kozin i Ruda, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Staświny na północ od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Siedliska i Kozin;c.gmina Kruklanki: w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Kruklanki na zachód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Stręgielek i Szczepanki. a. gmina Giżycko: Bogacko, Grajwo, Guty, Kamionki, Kąp, Kożuchy Wielkie, Pieczonki, Wrony, Sołdany, Sulimy, Szczybały Giżyckie, Upałty Małe, Wilkaski, Wilkasy, Wronka, Wrony, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Bogaczewo na północ od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Rydzewo i Bałowo, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Kruklin na zachód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Brożówka i Staświny, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Spytkowo na wschód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Świdry i Kożuchy Wielkie, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Sterławki Małe na wschód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Skop i Skrzypy; b. gmina Miłki: w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Kleszczewo na północ od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Kozin i Ruda, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Rydzewo na północ od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Kozin i Ruda, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Staświny na północ od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Siedliska i Kozin; c. gmina Kruklanki: w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Kruklanki na zachód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Stręgielek i Szczepanki.
a. gmina Giżycko: Bogacko, Grajwo, Guty, Kamionki, Kąp, Kożuchy Wielkie, Pieczonki, Wrony, Sołdany, Sulimy, Szczybały Giżyckie, Upałty Małe, Wilkaski, Wilkasy, Wronka, Wrony, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Bogaczewo na północ od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Rydzewo i Bałowo, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Kruklin na zachód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Brożówka i Staświny, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Spytkowo na wschód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Świdry i Kożuchy Wielkie, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Sterławki Małe na wschód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Skop i Skrzypy;
b. gmina Miłki: w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Kleszczewo na północ od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Kozin i Ruda, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Rydzewo na północ od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Kozin i Ruda, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Staświny na północ od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Siedliska i Kozin;
c. gmina Kruklanki: w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Kruklanki na zachód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Stręgielek i Szczepanki.
a. gmina Giżycko: Bogacko, Grajwo, Guty, Kamionki, Kąp, Kożuchy Wielkie, Pieczonki, Wrony, Sołdany, Sulimy, Szczybały Giżyckie, Upałty Małe, Wilkaski, Wilkasy, Wronka, Wrony, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Bogaczewo na północ od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Rydzewo i Bałowo, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Kruklin na zachód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Brożówka i Staświny, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Spytkowo na wschód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Świdry i Kożuchy Wielkie, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Sterławki Małe na wschód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Skop i Skrzypy;
b. gmina Miłki: w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Kleszczewo na północ od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Kozin i Ruda, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Rydzewo na północ od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Kozin i Ruda, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Staświny na północ od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Siedliska i Kozin;
c. gmina Kruklanki: w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Kruklanki na zachód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Stręgielek i Szczepanki.
2. powiat węgorzewski:a.gmina Pozezdrze: Harsz, Kolonia Pozezdrze, Pieczarki, Wyłudy, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Pozezdrze na południe od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Wyłudy i Okowizna;b.gmina Węgorzewo: w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Łabapa na południe od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Kolonia Rybacka i Skrzypy, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Sztynort Duży na południe od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Kolonia Rybacka i Skrzypy. a. gmina Pozezdrze: Harsz, Kolonia Pozezdrze, Pieczarki, Wyłudy, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Pozezdrze na południe od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Wyłudy i Okowizna; b. gmina Węgorzewo: w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Łabapa na południe od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Kolonia Rybacka i Skrzypy, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Sztynort Duży na południe od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Kolonia Rybacka i Skrzypy.
a. gmina Pozezdrze: Harsz, Kolonia Pozezdrze, Pieczarki, Wyłudy, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Pozezdrze na południe od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Wyłudy i Okowizna;
b. gmina Węgorzewo: w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Łabapa na południe od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Kolonia Rybacka i Skrzypy, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Sztynort Duży na południe od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Kolonia Rybacka i Skrzypy.
a. gmina Pozezdrze: Harsz, Kolonia Pozezdrze, Pieczarki, Wyłudy, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Pozezdrze na południe od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Wyłudy i Okowizna;
b. gmina Węgorzewo: w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Łabapa na południe od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Kolonia Rybacka i Skrzypy, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Sztynort Duży na południe od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Kolonia Rybacka i Skrzypy.
1. powiat giżycki:a.gmina Giżycko: Antonowo, Gajewo, Świdry, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Spytkowo na zachód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Świdry i Kożuchy Wielkie;b.miasto Giżycko. a. gmina Giżycko: Antonowo, Gajewo, Świdry, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Spytkowo na zachód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Świdry i Kożuchy Wielkie; b. miasto Giżycko.
a. gmina Giżycko: Antonowo, Gajewo, Świdry, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Spytkowo na zachód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Świdry i Kożuchy Wielkie;
b. miasto Giżycko.
a. gmina Giżycko: Antonowo, Gajewo, Świdry, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Spytkowo na zachód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Świdry i Kożuchy Wielkie;
b. miasto Giżycko.
1) Wola Ociecka, Blizna, Kamionka, Borek Mały w gminie Ostrów, powiat ropczycko-sędziszowski;
2) Ruda, Cierpisz, Czarna Sędziszowska, Boreczek, Sędziszów Małopolski oprócz osiedla Kawęczyn Sędziszowski, Góra Ropczycka w gminie Sędziszów Małopolski, powiat ropczycko-sędziszowski;
3) Ropczyce – oprócz osiedla Pietrzejowa, Gnojnica, Okonin, Łączki Kucharskie, Brzezówka, Lubzina w gminie Ropczyce, powiat ropczycko-sędziszowski;
4) Pustków, Pustków Osiedle, Pustynia, Kozłów, Brzeźnica, Paszczyna, Zawada, Stobierna w gminie Dębica, powiat dębicki;
5) Bobrowa Wola, Bobrowa, Korzeniów w gminie Żyraków, powiat dębicki;
6) Biały Bór, Tuszyma, Dobrynin w gminie Przecław, powiat mielecki;
7) Niwiska, Hucisko, Leszcze w gminie Niwiska, powiat kolbuszowski.
1) Ostrów, Kozodrza, Skrzyszów, Ocieka, Zdżary w gminie Ostrów, powiat ropczycko-sędziszowski;
2) Ropczyce – osiedle Pietrzejowa w gminie Ropczyce, powiat ropczycko-sędziszowski;
3) Kochanówka w gminie Dębica, powiat dębicki.
— powiat zgierski;
— powiat łęczycki;
— powiat zgierski;
1. w gminie Olszówka, miejscowości: Adamin, Umień, Złota, Łubianka, Szczepanów, Ostrów Kolonia, Głębokie, Krzewata, Tomaszew, Zawadka, Olszówka, Drzewce, Ponętów Górny;
2. w gminie Kłodawa, miejscowości: Bierzwienna Długa Kolonia, Bierzwienna Długa Wieś, Bierzwienna, Krótka, Cząstków, Dąbrówka, Górki, Janczewy, Korzecznik, Krzykosy, Kłodawa, Leszcze, Luboniek, Okoleniec, Pomarzany, Rysiny, Rysiny Kolonia, Tarnówka, Słupeczka;
3. w gminie Koło, miejscowości: Aleksandrówka, Chojny, Czołowo, Dąbrowa, Kaczyniec, Kamień, Kiełczew, Smużny Czwarty, Leśnica, Lucjanowo, Mikołajówek, Powiercie Kolonia, Powiercie Wieś, Przybyłów, Ruchenna, Skobielice, Sokołowo, Wrząca Wielka;
4. w gminie Kościelec miejscowości: Ruszków Pierwszy, Ruszków Drugi, Dobrów;
5. w gminie Babiak, miejscowości: Dębno Królewskie, Dębno Poproboszczowskie, Kiejsze, Korzecznik -Podlesie, Lipie Góry, Maliniec, Nowiny Brdowskie, Osówie, Podkiejsze;
6. w gminie Osiek Mały, miejscowości: Borecznia Mała, Borecznia Wielka, Felicjanów, Hilarów, Osiek Wielki;
7. w gminie Dąbie miejscowości: Ladorudz, Majdany, Rzuchów, Grabina Wielka;
8. w gminie Grzegorzew miejscowości: Ladorudzek, Tarnówka, Borysławice Kościelne;
9. Miasto Koło
1. w gminie Grzegorzew miejscowości: Barłogi, Boguszyniec, Borysławice Zamkowe, Bylice Kolonia, Bylice Wieś, Grodna, Grzegorzew, Kiełczewek, Ponętów Dolny, Zabłocie;
2. w gminie Koło miejscowości: Kiełczew Górny, Kiełczew Smużny I, Wandynów.
1. w powiecie kępińskim, w gminie Kępno, miejscowości: Rzetnia, Przybyszów, Szklarka Mielęcka, Dziekania, Zosin, Osiny, Kliny, Kępno, Hanulin, Krążkowy, Biały Młyn, Mianowice, Olszowa, Świba;
2. w powiecie kępińskim, w gminie Bralin, miejscowości: Chojęcin, Chojęcin-Szum, Weronikopole;
3. w powiecie kępińskim, w gminie Baranów, miejscowości: Baranów, Jankowy, Donaborów,
4. w powiecie ostrzeszowskim, w gminie Ostrzeszów, miejscowości: Turze, Kochłowy, Malinów, Źródelnia, Dobra, Wiązownia, Królewskie, Olszyna, Ostrzeszów, Ostrzeszów Pustkowie, Rogaszyce;
5. w powiecie ostrzeszowskim, w gminie Kobyla Góra, miejscowości: Zmyślona Parzynowska, Parzynów, Osiny;
6. w powiecie ostrzeszowskim, w gminie Doruchów, miejscowości: Wygoda Tokarska, Tokarzew, Pieczyska, Godziętowy, Przytocznica, Doruchów, Stara Kuźnica, Zalesie, Gruszków, Pyki, Wygoda Plugawska, Mieleszówka, Skarydzew, Morawin, Plugawice, Oświęcim, Tonia, Wrzosy, Torzeniec;
7. w powiecie ostrzeszowskim, w gminie Grabów nad Prosną, miejscowości: Bobrowniki, Marczykowskie, Kuźnica Bobrowska, Bułowe, Marszałki.
— w gminie Wieruszów: miejscowości w ich granicach administracyjnych Wyszanów, Mieczków Lubczyna, Kowalówka, Cieszęcin, Polesie, Teklinów, Mirków, Miasto Wieruszów, Kuźnica Skakawska, Dobrydział,
— w gminie Galewice: Osiek, Kolonia Osiek.
1. w powiecie kępińskim, w gminie Kępno, miejscowości: Mikorzyn, Mechnice, Domanin, Myjomice, Kierzenko, Ostrówiec, Kierzno, Pustkowie Kierzeńskie;
2. w powiecie ostrzeszowskim, w gminie Doruchów, miejscowość: Rudniczysko.
1. w powiecie kaliskim, w gminie Blizanów, miejscowość: Czajków, Zagorzyn, Żegocin, Piotrów, Pawłówek, Pruszków, Warszówka, Poklęków, Pamięcin;
2. w powiecie kaliskim, w gminie Koźminek, miejscowości: Bogdanów, Józefina (wraz z Murowaniec), Krzyżówki (wraz z Sokołówka), Młynisko, Nowy Nakwasin, Osuchów, Rogal, Smółki, Oszczeklin, Dąbrowa;
3. w powiecie kaliskim, w gminie Ceków-Kolonia, miejscowości: Kosmów-Kolonia, Morawin, Plewnia, Podzborów, Przedzeń, Szadek, Kuźnica, Nowa Plewnia, Ceków-Kolonia, Stare Prażuchy;
4. w powiecie kaliskim, w gminie Godziesze Wielkie, miejscowość: Wolica;
5. w powiecie kaliskim, w gminie Opatówek, w miejscowości: Opatówek, Chełmce, Cienia Druga (wraz z Bogumiłów), Cienia-Folwark, Cienia Pierwsza, Cienia Trzecia, Janików, Józefów, Michałów Drugi (wraz z Michałów Pierwszy), Nędzerzew, Porwity, Rajsko, Sierzchów, Szałe, Szulec, Tłokinia Nowa, Trojanów, Warszew, Modła, Zawady, Zduny, Michałów Czwarty;
6. w powiecie kaliskim, w gminie Szczytniki, miejscowości: Krowica Zawodnia (wraz z Grab), Marchwacz-Kolonia, Trzęsów, Marchwacz, Krowica Pusta, Radliczyce, Cieszyków, Murowaniec, Marcjanów, Szczytniki, Staw, Chojno Lipka, Kościany, Tymieniec, Gorzuchy, Mroczki Wielkie;
7. w powiecie kaliskim, w gminie Lisków, miejscowości: Budy Liskowskie, Swoboda, Józefów, Dębniałki, Małgów-Kolonia, Małgów, Strzałków, Chrusty, Nadzież, Madalin, Pyczek, Tomaszew, Lisków, Lisków-Rzgów, Żychów, Wygoda, Annopol, Zakrzyn-Kolonia, Zakrzyn, Koźlątków;
8. w powiecie kaliskim, w gminie Mycielin, miejscowość: Kuszyn (wraz z Jaszczury);
9. w powiecie kaliskim, w gminie Żelazków, miejscowości: Anielin, Biernatki, Borków Nowy, Borków Stary, Czartki, Garzew, Goliszew, Góry Zborowskie, Góry Złotnickie, Helenów, Janków, Kokanin, Kolonia Kokanin, Kolonia Skarszewek (wraz z Chrusty), Koronka, Michałów, Niedźwiady, Russów, Russówek, Strugi, Szosa Turecka, Tykadłów, Witoldów, Wojciechówka, Zborów, Złotniki Małe, Złotniki Wielkie, Żelazków;
10. w mieście Kalisz, osiedla: Adama Asnyka, Chmielnik, Czaszki, Dobro, Dobrzec P, Dobrzec W, Kaliniec, Korczak, Majków, Ogrody, Piskorzewie, Piwonice, Rajsków, Rogatka, Rypinek, Serbinów, Śródmieście, Tyniec, Widok, Winiary, Zagorzynek;
11. w powiecie tureckim, w gminie Kawęczyn, miejscowości: Chocim, Żdżary, Będziechów.
— w gminie Goszczanów, miejscowości: Lipicze, Lipicze Górne, Lipicze Olendry
1. powiecie kaliskim, w gminie Opatówek, miejscowości: Dębe-Kolonia, Kobierno, Rożdżały, Tłokinia Kościelna, Tłokinia Mała, Tłokinia Wielka, Słoneczna, Frankowizna, Borów, Zmyślanka;
2. w powiecie kaliskim, w gminie Ceków-Kolonia, miejscowości: Beznatka, Kamień, Bystrek, Cierpiatka, Kamień-Kolonia, Korek, Magdalenów;
3. w powiecie kaliskim, w gminie Koźminek, miejscowości: Dębsko, Emilianów (wraz z Zosina), Tymianek, Pietrzyków, Smółki, Ksawerów, Marianów, Złotniki, Nowy Karolew, Gać Kaliska, Stary Karolew, Chodybki, Moskurnia, miasto Koźminek (wraz z Przydziałki, Słowiki, Warwarówka), Stary Nakwasin;
4. w powiecie kaliskim, w gminie Żelazków miejscowość: Dębe, Florentyna, Ilno, Pólko, Skarszew, Skarszewek;
5. w powiecie kaliskim, w gminie Lisków, miejscowość: Trzebienie, Ciepielew.
— w gminie Goszczanów, miejscowości: Sokołów, Sulmów, Wola Tłomakowa
1) w powiecie nowosolskim,—w gminie Nowa Sól, miejscowości: Buczków, Lubięcin, Jeziorna, Jodłów, Dąbrowno, Chełmek, Stany Lipiny;—w gminie Kolsko, miejscowości: Uście, Tatarki, Jesiona, Sławocin, Tyrszeliny, Kolsko, Mesze;—w gminie Otyń, miejscowość Bobrowniki; — w gminie Nowa Sól, miejscowości: Buczków, Lubięcin, Jeziorna, Jodłów, Dąbrowno, Chełmek, Stany Lipiny; — w gminie Kolsko, miejscowości: Uście, Tatarki, Jesiona, Sławocin, Tyrszeliny, Kolsko, Mesze; — w gminie Otyń, miejscowość Bobrowniki;
— w gminie Nowa Sól, miejscowości: Buczków, Lubięcin, Jeziorna, Jodłów, Dąbrowno, Chełmek, Stany Lipiny;
— w gminie Kolsko, miejscowości: Uście, Tatarki, Jesiona, Sławocin, Tyrszeliny, Kolsko, Mesze;
— w gminie Otyń, miejscowość Bobrowniki;
— w gminie Nowa Sól, miejscowości: Buczków, Lubięcin, Jeziorna, Jodłów, Dąbrowno, Chełmek, Stany Lipiny;
— w gminie Kolsko, miejscowości: Uście, Tatarki, Jesiona, Sławocin, Tyrszeliny, Kolsko, Mesze;
— w gminie Otyń, miejscowość Bobrowniki;
2) w powiecie zielonogórskim,—w gminie Zabór, miejscowości: Tarnawa, Milsko, Dąbrowa, Zabór;—w gminie Bojadła, miejscowości: Bojadła, Przewóz, Klenica, Siadcza, Bełcze, Pólko Sosnówka;—w gminie Kargowa, miejscowość Karszyn; — w gminie Zabór, miejscowości: Tarnawa, Milsko, Dąbrowa, Zabór; — w gminie Bojadła, miejscowości: Bojadła, Przewóz, Klenica, Siadcza, Bełcze, Pólko Sosnówka; — w gminie Kargowa, miejscowość Karszyn;
— w gminie Zabór, miejscowości: Tarnawa, Milsko, Dąbrowa, Zabór;
— w gminie Bojadła, miejscowości: Bojadła, Przewóz, Klenica, Siadcza, Bełcze, Pólko Sosnówka;
— w gminie Kargowa, miejscowość Karszyn;
— w gminie Zabór, miejscowości: Tarnawa, Milsko, Dąbrowa, Zabór;
— w gminie Bojadła, miejscowości: Bojadła, Przewóz, Klenica, Siadcza, Bełcze, Pólko Sosnówka;
— w gminie Kargowa, miejscowość Karszyn;
3) w powiecie wschowskim—w gminie Sława, miejscowości: Ciosaniec, Droniki, Gola, Szreniawa, Lubiatów, Lubogoszcz, Kuźnica Głogowska, Tarnów Jezierny, część miejscowości Sława (część miejscowości położona na południowy zachód od drogi DW 278). — w gminie Sława, miejscowości: Ciosaniec, Droniki, Gola, Szreniawa, Lubiatów, Lubogoszcz, Kuźnica Głogowska, Tarnów Jezierny, część miejscowości Sława (część miejscowości położona na południowy zachód od drogi DW 278).
— w gminie Sława, miejscowości: Ciosaniec, Droniki, Gola, Szreniawa, Lubiatów, Lubogoszcz, Kuźnica Głogowska, Tarnów Jezierny, część miejscowości Sława (część miejscowości położona na południowy zachód od drogi DW 278).
— w gminie Sława, miejscowości: Ciosaniec, Droniki, Gola, Szreniawa, Lubiatów, Lubogoszcz, Kuźnica Głogowska, Tarnów Jezierny, część miejscowości Sława (część miejscowości położona na południowy zachód od drogi DW 278).
1. w gminie Wolsztyn, miejscowości: Wilcze, Rudno, część miejscowości Świętno na południe od Południowego Kanału Obry.
1) w powiecie nowosolskim, w gminie Kolsko, miejscowości: Konotop, Lipka
2) w powiecie zielonogórskim, w gminie Bojadła, miejscowości: Pyrnik Młynkowo, Kartno, Susłów
1. w gminie Lisków: Budy Liskowskie, Ciepielów, Lisków, Swoboda, Trzebienie;
2. w gminie Koźminek: Chodybki, Dębsko, Gać Kaliska, Koźminek, Ksawerów, Marianów, Moskurnia, Nowy Karolew, Oszczeklin, Pietrzyków.
1. w gminie Błaszki, miejscowości: obszar wiejski: Adamki, Borysławice, Chabierów, Domaniew, Garbów, Golków, Gorzałów, Kalinowa, Kamienna, Kamienna Kolonia, Kołdów, Kwasków, Lubanów, Maciszewice, Orzeżyn, Skalmierz, Smaszków, Suliszewice, Wójcice oraz miasto Błaszki – obręb 1;
2. w gminie Goszczanów, miejscowości: Czerniaków, Gawłowice, Goszczanów, Janówek, Karolina, Kaszew, Lipicze, Poniatów, Poniatówek, Poprężniki, Poradzew, Rzężawy, Sokołów, Strachanów, Sulmów, Wacławów, Wola Tłomakowa, Wroniawy;
3. w gminie Warta, miejscowości: Augustynów, Cielce, Czartki, Duszniki, Gać Warcka, Grzybki, Góra, Głaniszew, Kawęczynek, Małków, Mikołajewice, Raczków, Socha, Socha Kolonia, Tomisławice, Ustków, Witów, Wola Zadąbrowska Stara Wieś, Wola Zadąbrowska Nowa Wieś, Zadąbrów Rudunek, Zadąbrów Wiatraki, Zagajew oraz miasto Warta – obręb 1, obręb 16, obręb 2, obręb 3, obręb 4, obręb 5, obręb 6, obręb 7, obręb 8.
— w gminie Szczytniki: Mroczki Wielkie.
— w gminie Goszczanów, miejscowości: Chlewo, Chwalęcice, Stojanów, Sulmówek, Świnice Kaliskie, Waliszewice, Wilkszyce;
— w gminie Błaszki, miejscowości: Kobylniki, Korzenica, Morawki, Nacesławice, Sędzimirowice
— w gminie Warta, miejscowości: Krąków, Zielęcin.
ADIS reference number of the outbreak Area comprising: Date until applicable in accordance with Article 55 of Delegated Regulation (EU) 2020/687
PT-HPAI(P)-2025-00001 The parts of from the county of Sintra and the parts of the county of Mafra from the district of Lisboa, that are beyond the areas described in the protection zone, and are contained within circle of 10 kilometers radius, centered on GPS coordinates 38.898732N, -9.400721W 10.2.2025
The parts from the county of Sintra, from the district of Lisboa, that are contained within circle of 3 kilometers radius, centered on GPS coordinates 38.898732N, -9.400721W 2.2.2025-10.2.2025
PT-HPAI(P)-2025-00002 The parts of from the county of Sintra and the parts of the county of Mafra from the district of Lisboa, that are beyond the areas described in the protection zone, and are contained within circle of 10 kilometers radius, centered on GPS coordinates 38.905151N, -9.407569W 17.2.2025
The parts from the county of Sintra, from the district of Lisboa, that are contained within circle of 3 kilometers radius, centered on GPS coordinates 38.905151N, -9.407569W 9.2.2025-17.2.2025
PT-HPAI(NON-P)-2025-00001 The parts of from the county of Caldas da Rainha that are beyond the areas described in the protection zone, and the parts of the county of Alcobaça and Óbidos, from the district of Leiria, that are contained within the circle of 10 kilometers radius, centered on GPS coordinates 39.434184N, -9.142658W 23.2.2025
The parts from the county of Caldas da Rainha, from the district of Leiria, that are contained within circle of 3 kilometers radius, centered on GPS coordinates 39.434184N, -9.142658W 15.2.2025-23.2.2025
PT-HPAI(NON-P)-2025-00003 The parts of from the counties of Albergaria-a-Velha, Aveiro and Estarreja that are beyond the areas described in the protection zone, and the parts of the counties Albergaria-a-Velha, Aveiro, Estarreja, Águeda and Murtosa, from the district of Aveiro, that are contained within the circle of 10 kilometers radius, centered on GPS coordinates 40.675658N, -8.559449W 3.3.2025
The parts from the counties of Albergaria-a-Velha, Aveiro and Estarreja, from the district of Aveiro, that are contained within circle of 3 kilometers radius, centered on GPS coordinates 40.675658N, -8.559449W 23.2.2025 -3.3.2025
Area comprising: Date until measures are to remain applicable in accordance with Article 4
Lombardia region:
—Municipality of Acquanegra sul Chiese (Mantova)—Municipality of Asola (Mantova)—Municipality of Bagnolo San Vito (Mantova)—Municipality of Borgo Virgilio (Mantova)—Municipality of Canneto sull'Oglio (Mantova)—Municipality of Casalmoro (Mantova)—Municipality of Casaloldo (Mantova)—Municipality of Casalromano (Mantova)—Municipality of Castel d'Ario (Mantova)—Municipality of Castel Goffredo (Mantova)—Municipality of Castelbelforte (Mantova)—Municipality of Castiglione delle Stiviere (Mantova)—Municipality of Cavriana (Mantova)—Municipality of Ceresara (Mantova)—Municipality of Gazoldo degli Ippoliti (Mantova)—Municipality of Goito (Mantova)—Municipality of Guidizzolo (Mantova)—Municipality of Mantova (Mantova)—Municipality of Mariana Mantovana (Mantova)—Municipality of Marmirolo (Mantova)—Municipality of Medole (Mantova)—Municipality of Monzambano (Mantova)—Municipality of Piubega (Mantova)—Municipality of Ponti sul Mincio (Mantova)—Municipality of Porto Mantovano (Mantova)—Municipality of Redondesco (Mantova)—Municipality of Rodigo (Mantova)—Municipality of Roncoferraro (Mantova)—Municipality of Roverbella (Mantova)—Municipality of San Giorgio Bigarello (Mantova)—Municipality of Solferino (Mantova)—Municipality of Villimpenta (Mantova)—Municipality of Volta Mantovana (Mantova) — Municipality of Acquanegra sul Chiese (Mantova) — Municipality of Asola (Mantova) — Municipality of Bagnolo San Vito (Mantova) — Municipality of Borgo Virgilio (Mantova) — Municipality of Canneto sull'Oglio (Mantova) — Municipality of Casalmoro (Mantova) — Municipality of Casaloldo (Mantova) — Municipality of Casalromano (Mantova) — Municipality of Castel d'Ario (Mantova) — Municipality of Castel Goffredo (Mantova) — Municipality of Castelbelforte (Mantova) — Municipality of Castiglione delle Stiviere (Mantova) — Municipality of Cavriana (Mantova) — Municipality of Ceresara (Mantova) — Municipality of Gazoldo degli Ippoliti (Mantova) — Municipality of Goito (Mantova) — Municipality of Guidizzolo (Mantova) — Municipality of Mantova (Mantova) — Municipality of Mariana Mantovana (Mantova) — Municipality of Marmirolo (Mantova) — Municipality of Medole (Mantova) — Municipality of Monzambano (Mantova) — Municipality of Piubega (Mantova) — Municipality of Ponti sul Mincio (Mantova) — Municipality of Porto Mantovano (Mantova) — Municipality of Redondesco (Mantova) — Municipality of Rodigo (Mantova) — Municipality of Roncoferraro (Mantova) — Municipality of Roverbella (Mantova) — Municipality of San Giorgio Bigarello (Mantova) — Municipality of Solferino (Mantova) — Municipality of Villimpenta (Mantova) — Municipality of Volta Mantovana (Mantova) 28.2.2025
— Municipality of Acquanegra sul Chiese (Mantova)
— Municipality of Asola (Mantova)
— Municipality of Bagnolo San Vito (Mantova)
— Municipality of Borgo Virgilio (Mantova)
— Municipality of Canneto sull'Oglio (Mantova)
— Municipality of Casalmoro (Mantova)
— Municipality of Casaloldo (Mantova)
— Municipality of Casalromano (Mantova)
— Municipality of Castel d'Ario (Mantova)
— Municipality of Castel Goffredo (Mantova)
— Municipality of Castelbelforte (Mantova)
— Municipality of Castiglione delle Stiviere (Mantova)
— Municipality of Cavriana (Mantova)
— Municipality of Ceresara (Mantova)
— Municipality of Gazoldo degli Ippoliti (Mantova)
— Municipality of Goito (Mantova)
— Municipality of Guidizzolo (Mantova)
— Municipality of Mantova (Mantova)
— Municipality of Mariana Mantovana (Mantova)
— Municipality of Marmirolo (Mantova)
— Municipality of Medole (Mantova)
— Municipality of Monzambano (Mantova)
— Municipality of Piubega (Mantova)
— Municipality of Ponti sul Mincio (Mantova)
— Municipality of Porto Mantovano (Mantova)
— Municipality of Redondesco (Mantova)
— Municipality of Rodigo (Mantova)
— Municipality of Roncoferraro (Mantova)
— Municipality of Roverbella (Mantova)
— Municipality of San Giorgio Bigarello (Mantova)
— Municipality of Solferino (Mantova)
— Municipality of Villimpenta (Mantova)
— Municipality of Volta Mantovana (Mantova)
Veneto region:
—Municipality of Buttapietra (Verona)—Municipality of Castel d'Azzano (Verona)—Municipality of Castelnuovo del Garda (Verona) South of A4—Municipality of Erbè (Verona)—Municipality of Isola della Scala (Verona)—Municipality of Mozzecane (Verona)—Municipality of Nogara (Verona) North of SR10—Municipality of Nogarole Rocca (Verona)—Municipality of Peschiera del Garda (Verona) South of A4—Municipality of Povegliano Veronese (Verona)—Municipality of Sommacampagna (Verona) South of A4—Municipality of Sona (Verona) South of A4—Municipality of Sorgà (Verona) North of SR10—Municipality of Trevenzuolo (Verona)—Municipality of Valeggio sul Mincio (Verona)—Municipality of Verona (Verona) South of A4/West of San Giovanni Lupatoto—Municipality of Vigasio (Verona)—Municipality of Villafranca di Verona (Verona) — Municipality of Buttapietra (Verona) — Municipality of Castel d'Azzano (Verona) — Municipality of Castelnuovo del Garda (Verona) South of A4 — Municipality of Erbè (Verona) — Municipality of Isola della Scala (Verona) — Municipality of Mozzecane (Verona) — Municipality of Nogara (Verona) North of SR10 — Municipality of Nogarole Rocca (Verona) — Municipality of Peschiera del Garda (Verona) South of A4 — Municipality of Povegliano Veronese (Verona) — Municipality of Sommacampagna (Verona) South of A4 — Municipality of Sona (Verona) South of A4 — Municipality of Sorgà (Verona) North of SR10 — Municipality of Trevenzuolo (Verona) — Municipality of Valeggio sul Mincio (Verona) — Municipality of Verona (Verona) South of A4/West of San Giovanni Lupatoto — Municipality of Vigasio (Verona) — Municipality of Villafranca di Verona (Verona) 28.2.2025
— Municipality of Buttapietra (Verona)
— Municipality of Castel d'Azzano (Verona)
— Municipality of Castelnuovo del Garda (Verona) South of A4
— Municipality of Erbè (Verona)
— Municipality of Isola della Scala (Verona)
— Municipality of Mozzecane (Verona)
— Municipality of Nogara (Verona) North of SR10
— Municipality of Nogarole Rocca (Verona)
— Municipality of Peschiera del Garda (Verona) South of A4
— Municipality of Povegliano Veronese (Verona)
— Municipality of Sommacampagna (Verona) South of A4
— Municipality of Sona (Verona) South of A4
— Municipality of Sorgà (Verona) North of SR10
— Municipality of Trevenzuolo (Verona)
— Municipality of Valeggio sul Mincio (Verona)
— Municipality of Verona (Verona) South of A4/West of San Giovanni Lupatoto
— Municipality of Vigasio (Verona)
— Municipality of Villafranca di Verona (Verona)
— Municipality of Acquanegra sul Chiese (Mantova)
— Municipality of Asola (Mantova)
— Municipality of Bagnolo San Vito (Mantova)
— Municipality of Borgo Virgilio (Mantova)
— Municipality of Canneto sull'Oglio (Mantova)
— Municipality of Casalmoro (Mantova)
— Municipality of Casaloldo (Mantova)
— Municipality of Casalromano (Mantova)
— Municipality of Castel d'Ario (Mantova)
— Municipality of Castel Goffredo (Mantova)
— Municipality of Castelbelforte (Mantova)
— Municipality of Castiglione delle Stiviere (Mantova)
— Municipality of Cavriana (Mantova)
— Municipality of Ceresara (Mantova)
— Municipality of Gazoldo degli Ippoliti (Mantova)
— Municipality of Goito (Mantova)
— Municipality of Guidizzolo (Mantova)
— Municipality of Mantova (Mantova)
— Municipality of Mariana Mantovana (Mantova)
— Municipality of Marmirolo (Mantova)
— Municipality of Medole (Mantova)
— Municipality of Monzambano (Mantova)
— Municipality of Piubega (Mantova)
— Municipality of Ponti sul Mincio (Mantova)
— Municipality of Porto Mantovano (Mantova)
— Municipality of Redondesco (Mantova)
— Municipality of Rodigo (Mantova)
— Municipality of Roncoferraro (Mantova)
— Municipality of Roverbella (Mantova)
— Municipality of San Giorgio Bigarello (Mantova)
— Municipality of Solferino (Mantova)
— Municipality of Villimpenta (Mantova)
— Municipality of Volta Mantovana (Mantova)
— Municipality of Buttapietra (Verona)
— Municipality of Castel d'Azzano (Verona)
— Municipality of Castelnuovo del Garda (Verona) South of A4
— Municipality of Erbè (Verona)
— Municipality of Isola della Scala (Verona)
— Municipality of Mozzecane (Verona)
— Municipality of Nogara (Verona) North of SR10
— Municipality of Nogarole Rocca (Verona)
— Municipality of Peschiera del Garda (Verona) South of A4
— Municipality of Povegliano Veronese (Verona)
— Municipality of Sommacampagna (Verona) South of A4
— Municipality of Sona (Verona) South of A4
— Municipality of Sorgà (Verona) North of SR10
— Municipality of Trevenzuolo (Verona)
— Municipality of Valeggio sul Mincio (Verona)
— Municipality of Verona (Verona) South of A4/West of San Giovanni Lupatoto
— Municipality of Vigasio (Verona)
— Municipality of Villafranca di Verona (Verona)
* In accordance with the Agreement on the withdrawal of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland from the European Union and the European Atomic Energy Community, and in particular Article 5(4) of the Windsor Framework (see Joint Declaration No 1/2023 of the Union and the United Kingdom in the Joint Committee established by the Agreement on the withdrawal of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland from the European Union and the European Atomic Energy Community of 24 March 2023,OJ L 102, 17.4.2023, p.87) in conjunction with Annex 2 to that Framework, for the purposes of this Annex, references to Member State include the United Kingdom in respect of Northern Ireland.
THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,
Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,
Having regard to Regulation (EU) 2016/429 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 9 March 2016 on transmissible animal diseases and amending and repealing certain acts in the area of animal health (‘Animal Health Law’) (1), and in particular Article 259(1), point (c), thereof,
Whereas:
(1) Highly pathogenic avian influenza (HPAI) is an infectious viral disease in birds and can have a severe impact on the profitability of poultry farming causing disturbance to trade within the Union and exports to third countries. HPAI viruses can infect migratory birds, which can then spread these viruses over long distances during their autumn and spring migrations. Therefore, the presence of HPAI viruses in wild birds poses a continuous threat for the direct and indirect introduction of these viruses into holdings where poultry or captive birds are kept. In the event of an outbreak of HPAI, there is a risk that the disease agent may spread to other holdings where poultry or captive birds are kept.
(2) Regulation (EU) 2016/429 establishes the legislative framework for the prevention and control of diseases that are transmissible to animals or humans. HPAI falls within the definition of a listed disease in that Regulation, and it is subject to the disease prevention and control rules laid down therein. In addition, Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2020/687 (2) supplements Regulation (EU) 2016/429 as regards the rules for the prevention and control of certain listed diseases, including disease control measures for HPAI.
(3) On 24 October 2023, the Commission adopted Commission Implementing Decision (EU) 2023/2447 (3) on the basis of Regulation (EU) 2016/429 which lays down emergency measures at Union level in relation to outbreaks of HPAI.
(4) In particular, Implementing Decision (EU) 2023/2447 provides that the protection, surveillance and further restricted zones, to be established by the concerned Member States following outbreaks of HPAI, in accordance with Delegated Regulation (EU) 2020/687, must comprise at least the areas listed as protection, surveillance and further restricted zones in the Annex to that Implementing Decision.
(5) The Annex to Implementing Decision (EU) 2023/2447 was recently amended by Commission Implementing Decision (EU) 2025/270 (4) following further outbreaks of HPAI in Germany, Italy, Lithuania, Hungary, Poland and Portugal in establishments where poultry or captive birds were kept, which needed to be reflected in that Annex.
(6) Since the date of adoption of Implementing Decision (EU) 2025/270, Belgium, Bulgaria, Germany, Italy, Hungary, the Netherlands, Poland and Portugal have notified the Commission of further outbreaks of HPAI, in establishments where poultry or captive birds were kept, located in the province of Liege in Belgium, in the district of Plovdiv in Bulgaria, in the Lower Saxony state in Germany, in the Piemonte region in Italy, in the Hajdú-Bihar county in Hungary, in the province of Friesland in the Netherlands, in the Łódzkie, Lubuskie, Mazowieckie and Wielkopolskie voivodeships in Poland and in the Aveiro district in Portugal.
(7) Belgium, Bulgaria, Germany, Italy, Hungary, the Netherlands, Poland and Portugal have taken the disease control measures required in accordance with Delegated Regulation (EU) 2020/687, including the establishment of protection and surveillance zones around the outbreaks.
(8) The Commission has examined the disease control measures taken by Belgium, Bulgaria, Germany, Italy, Hungary, the Netherlands, Poland and Portugal and it is satisfied that the boundaries of the protection and surveillances zones established by those Member States are at a sufficient distance from the establishments where outbreaks of HPAI have been confirmed.
(9) In the Annex to Implementing Decision (EU) 2023/2447, there are currently no areas listed as protection and surveillance zones for Belgium and Bulgaria, and there are no areas listed as a protection zone for the Netherlands.
(10) In order to prevent any unnecessary disturbance to trade within the Union and to avoid unjustified barriers to trade being imposed by third countries, it is necessary to rapidly lay down at Union level, in collaboration with Belgium, Bulgaria, Germany, Italy, Hungary, the Netherlands, Poland and Portugal, the protection and surveillance zones established by those Member States, in accordance with Delegated Regulation (EU) 2020/687.
(11) Therefore, the areas listed as protection and surveillance zones for Germany, Italy, Hungary, Poland and Portugal, and the surveillance zone for the Netherlands in the Annex to Implementing Decision (EU) 2023/2447 should be updated.
(12) In addition, the protection and surveillance zones for Belgium and Bulgaria and the protection zone for the Netherlands should be listed in the Annex to Implementing Decision (EU) 2023/2447.
(13) Accordingly, the Annex to Implementing Decision (EU) 2023/2447 should be amended to update the regionalisation at Union level and to take account of the protection and surveillance zones established by Belgium, Bulgaria, Germany, Italy, Hungary, the Netherlands, Poland and Portugal, in accordance with Delegated Regulation (EU) 2020/687, as well as to set out the duration of the measures applicable therein.
(14) Implementing Decision (EU) 2023/2447 should therefore be amended accordingly.
(15) Given the urgency of the epidemiological situation in the Union as regards the spread of HPAI, it is important that the amendments to be made to Implementing Decision (EU) 2023/2447 by this Decision take effect as soon as possible.
(16) The measures provided for in this Decision are in accordance with the opinion of the Standing Committee on Plants, Animals, Food and Feed,
HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
The Annex to Implementing Decision (EU) 2023/2447 is replaced by the text set out in the Annex to this Decision.
This Decision is addressed to the Member States.

Part A

Protection zones in the concerned Member States* as referred to in Article 1, point (a), and Article 2:

Member State: Belgium

ADIS reference number of the outbreak
Area comprising:
Date until applicable in accordance with Article 39 of Delegated Regulation (EU) 2020/687
Province: Liege
BE-HPAI(NON-P)-2025-00003
Those parts of the municipalities Beyne-Heusay, Blegny, Herstal, Luik, Oupeye, Soumagne and Wezet contained within a circle of a radius of 3 kilometres, centered on WGS84 dec. coordinates long 5,652532, lat 50,659096. 20.2.2025

Member State: Bulgaria

ADIS reference number of the outbreak
Area comprising:
Date until applicable in accordance with Article 39 of Delegated Regulation (EU) 2020/687
Plovdiv region
BG-HPAI(P)-2025-00001
The following villages in Asenovgrad municipality
—
Asenovgrad
—
Boyantsi
The following villages in Sadovo municipality
—
Mominsko
14.3.2025

Member State: Germany

ADIS reference number of the outbreak
Area comprising:
Date until applicable in accordance with Article 39 of Delegated Regulation (EU) 2020/687
NIEDERSACHSEN
DE-HPAI(P)-2025-00003
Landkreis Grafschaft Bentheim
3 km Radius um den Ausbruchsbetrieb mit den GPS-Koordinaten 6.979736, 52.585098. Betroffen sind Teile der Gemeinden Hoogstede, Osterwald und Ringe
15.2.2025
DE-HPAI(P)-2025-00004
Landkreis Aurich
3 km Radius um den Ausbruchsbetrieb mit den GPS-Koordinaten 7.612823, 53.484455. Betroffen sind Teile der Gemeinde Großefehn und der Stadt Aurich.
27.2.2025
DE-HPAI(P)-2025-00005
Landkreis Friesland
3 km Radius um den Ausbruchsbetrieb mit den GPS-Koordinaten 7.897797, 53.702855. Betroffen sind Teile der Gemeinde Wangerland.
27.2.2025

Member State: Italy

ADIS reference number of the outbreak
Area comprising:
Date until applicable in accordance with Article 39 of Delegated Regulation (EU) 2020/687
Veneto region:
IT-HPAI(P)-2025-00015
The area of the parts of Veneto Region contained within a circle of radius of three kilometres, centred on WGS84 dec. coordinates N 45.387097, E 10.845679
7.2.2025
IT-HPAI(P)-2025-00016
The area of the parts of Veneto Region contained within a circle of radius of three kilometres, centred on WGS84 dec. coordinates N 45.328305525, E 10.962802707
7.2.2025
IT-HPAI(P)-2025- 00018
The area of the parts of Veneto Region contained within a circle of radius of three kilometres, centred on WGS84 dec. coordinates N 45.307002212, E 10.924128439
27.2.2025
IT-HPAI(P)-2025- 00019
The area of the parts of Veneto Region contained within a circle of radius of three kilometres, centred on WGS84 dec. coordinates N 45.313221094, E 11.032151414
20.2.2025
IT-HPAI(P)-2025- 00020
The area of the parts of Veneto Region contained within a circle of radius of three kilometres, centred on WGS84 dec. coordinates N 45.416369117, E 10.788320732
24.2.2025
Lombardia region:
IT-HPAI(P)-2025-00001
The area of the parts of Lombardia Region contained within a circle of radius of three kilometres, centred on WGS84 dec. coordinates N 45.297148, E 10.761502
7.2.2025
IT-HPAI(P)-2025-00002
The area of the parts of Lombardia Region contained within a circle of radius of three kilometres, centred on WGS84 dec. coordinates N 45.312173, E 10.785147
12.2.2025
IT-HPAI(P)-2025-00003
The area of the parts of Lombardia Region contained within a circle of radius of three kilometres, centred on WGS84 dec. coordinates N 45.289988, E 10.765221
11.2.2025
IT-HPAI(P)-2025-00004
The area of the parts of Lombardia Region contained within a circle of radius of three kilometres, centred on WGS84 dec. coordinates N 45.289456, E 10.758892
11.2.2025
IT-HPAI(P)-2025-00009
The area of the parts of Lombardia Region contained within a circle of radius of three kilometres, centred on WGS84 dec. coordinates N 45.295545, E 10.762689
13.2.2025
IT-HPAI(P)-2025-00010
The area of the parts of Lombardia Region contained within a circle of radius of three kilometres, centred on WGS84 dec. coordinates N 45.28669, E 10.780547
14.2.2025
IT-HPAI(P)-2025-00011
The area of the parts of Lombardia Region contained within a circle of radius of three kilometres, centred on WGS84 dec. coordinates N 45.2787, E 10.800989
7.2.2025
IT-HPAI(P)-2025-00017
The area of the parts of Lombardia Region contained within a circle of radius of three kilometres, centred on WGS84 dec. coordinates N 45.306725, E 10.794453
13.2.2025
Piemonte region:
IT-HPAI(P)-2025-00021
The area of the parts of Piemonte Region contained within a circle of radius of three kilometres, centred on WGS84 dec. coordinates N 45.184691, E 7.95224999
5.3.2025

Member State: Lithuania

ADIS reference number of the outbreak
Area comprising:
Date until applicable in accordance with Article 39 of Delegated Regulation (EU) 2020/687
LT-HPAI(P)-2025-00001
Klaipeda district municipality Priekule parish Lankupiai village, Liaunai village, Grumbliai village, Silininkai village.
Silutes district municipality Saugu parish Pangiriai village, Sakuteliai village, Grumbliai village., Silininkai village, Ciuteliai village, Mantvydai village, Bundalai village, Stankaiciai village, Vilkmedziai village, Begedziai village, Kabeliai village, Lankupiai village, Vilkyciai village
28.2.2025

Member State: Hungary

ADIS reference number of the outbreak
Area comprising:
Date until applicable in accordance with Article 39 of Delegated Regulation (EU) 2020/687
Szabolcs-Szatmár-Bereg vármegye
HU-HPAI(P)-2025-00003
Balkány település közigazgatási területének a 47.684926 és a 21.866182 GPS-koordináták által meghatározott pont körüli 3 km sugarú körön belül eső területe.
9.2.2025
Hajdú-Bihar vármegye
HU-HPAI(P)-2025-00003
Nyíradony település közigazgatási területének a 47.684926 és a 21.866182 GPS-koordináták által meghatározott pont körüli 3 km sugarú körön belül eső területe.
9.2.2025
HU-HPAI(P)-2025-00004
HU-HPAI(P)-2025-00007
Báránd, Bihardancsháza, Földes, Kaba, Nagyrábé, Sáp és SápTetétlen települések közigazgatási területének a 47.255532, 21.321795, valamint a 47.288012 és a 21.284262 GPS-koordináták által meghatározott pont körüli 3 km sugarú körön belül eső területe.
9.3.2025
Heves vármegye
HU-HPAI(P)-2025-00005
Átány, Heves települések közigazgatási területének a 47.623310 és a 20.285607 GPS-koordináták által meghatározott pont körüli 3 km sugarú körön belül eső területe.
22.2.2025
Pest vármegye
HU-HPAI(P)-2025-00006
Bag, Domony, Gödöllő és Veresegyház közigazgatási területének a 47.621000 és a 19.383500 GPS-koordináták által meghatározott pont körüli 3 km sugarú körön belül eső területe.
23.2.2025

Member State: the Netherlands

ADIS reference number of the outbreak
Area comprising:
Date until applicable in accordance with Article 39 of Delegated Regulation (EU) 2020/687
Municipality Súdwest Fryslan Province Friesland
NL-HPAI(P)-2025-00005
Those parts of the the Municipality Súdwest Fryslan in the province Friesland contained within a circle of a radius of 3 kilometres, centered on WGS84 dec. coordinates long 5.431 / lat 53.049
21.2.2025

Member State: Poland

ADIS reference number of the outbreak
Area comprising:
Date until applicable in accordance with Article 39 of Delegated Regulation (EU) 2020/687
PL-HPAI(P)-2025-00002
PL-HPAI(P)-2025-00007
PL-HPAI(P)-2025-00015
W województwie mazowieckim:
powiat żuromiński: a)
w gminie Bieżuń, miejscowości: Bielawy Gołuskie, Dąbrówki na wschód od drogi krajowej 561 oraz na północ od odnogi rzeki Wkra, Dźwierzno, Gołuszyn na południowy zachód od rzeki Dopływ spod Stawiszyna, Karniszyn, Karniszyn-Parcele, Kobyla Łąka, Kocewo, Myślin, Sadłowo, Sadłowo-Parcele, Stawiszyn-Łaziska, Sławęcin na zachód od rzeki Dopływ spod Stawiszyna oraz miasto Bieżuń z wyjątkiem części miejscowości ograniczonej drogą krajową nr 541, ulicą Lawendową oraz ulicą Płocką, Strzeszewo; b)
w gminie Żuromin, miejscowości: Chamsk z wyjątkiem części miejscowości ograniczonej na zachód drogą krajową nr 541, na południe ul. Wyzwolenia oraz na wschód ulicą Mazowiecką aż do granicy miejscowości, Franciszkowo za wyjątkiem części miejscowości na północ od ul. Ponad Lasem, Młudzyn.
25.2.2025
PL-HPAI(NON-P)-2025-00004
W województwie podkarpackim, w powiecie jarosławskim: 1)
Surochów, Koniaczów, Munina, Sobiecin, Tuczempy, Zgoda w gminie
wiejskiej Jarosław; 2)
Wietlin w gminie Laszki; 3)
Ostrów w gminie Radymno.
11.2.2025
PL-HPAI(P)-2025-00003
W województwie warmińsko-mazurskim: 3. powiat giżycki:
a.
gmina Giżycko: Sterławki Małe, Sterławki Średnie, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Bogacko na południe od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Kronowo i Wrony, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Wrony na zachód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Kamionki i Jagodne Małe;
b.
gmina Ryn: Sterławki Wielkie, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Jeziorko na północ od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Orło i Szczybały Giżyckie, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Kronowo na południe od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Bałowo i Kamionki.
16.2.2025
PL-HPAI(P)-2025-00004
Obszar zapowietrzony w województwie zachodniopomorskim: 1. Część gminy Osina w powiecie goleniowskim, 2. Część gminy Nowogard w powiecie goleniowskim 3. Część gminy Maszewo w powiecie goleniowskim
Zawierający się w promieniu 3 km od współrzędnych 53.58037 15.06903
17.2.2025
PL-HPAI(P)-2025-00005
—
woj łódzkie:
—
powiat kutnowski, gmina Kutno: Gołębiewek Nowy, Gołębiewek Stary, Krzesin, Wroczyny, Ryków, Krzesin – Parcela, Krzesinówek, Adamów, Adamowice od ul. Krośniewickiej 33 w kierunku miejscowości Skłóty, Podczachy, Franki Wroczyńskie;
—
powiat kutnowski, gmina Nowe Ostrowy: Grochów, Wołodrza, Grochówek, Kały – Towarzystwo, Perna;
—
powiat kutnowski, gmina Krośniewice: Nowe, Skłóty, Szubina, Szubsk Duży, Witów, Szubsk – Towarzystwo, Cygany, Pomarzany od nr 36 w kierunku miejscowości Szubina, Pawlikowice od nr 22 w kierunku miejscowości Nowe, Iwiczna od nr 29 w kierunku miejscowości Skłóty
zawierające się w promieniu 3 km od współrzędnych GPS: 52.2460533453/19.2526209874
17.2.2025
PL-HPAI(P)-2025-00006
W województwie warmińsko-mazurskim: 1. powiat iławski:
a.
gmina Kisielice: Byliny, Goryń, Kantowo, Krzywka, Wałdowo, w granicach administracyjnych miasta Kisielice na południe od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Limża i Wola, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Limża na południe od drogi krajowej nr 16, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Łodygowo na południe od drogi krajowej nr 16, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Ogrodzieniec na południe od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Trumieje i Trupel, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Sobiewola na południe od drogi krajowej nr 16. 16.2.2025
PL-HPAI(P)-2025-00008
W województwie warmińsko-mazurskim: 1. powiat giżycki:
a.
gmina Giżycko: Antonowo, Gajewo, Świdry, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Spytkowo na zachód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Świdry i Kożuchy Wielkie;
b.
miasto Giżycko.
17.2.2025
PL-HPAI(P)-2025-00009
W województwie podkarpackim: 1)
Ostrów, Kozodrza, Skrzyszów, Ocieka, Zdżary w gminie Ostrów, powiat ropczycko-sędziszowski; 2)
Ropczyce – osiedle Pietrzejowa w gminie Ropczyce, powiat ropczycko-sędziszowski; 3)
Kochanówka w gminie Dębica, powiat dębicki.
22.2.2025
PL-HPAI(P)-2025-00010
—
woj łódzkie:
—
powiat zgierski;
gmina Ozorków: Boczki, Skotniki, Małachowice, Małachowice-Kolonia, Sokolniki-Parcela, Sokolniki, Maszkowice, Helenów, Ozorków na północ ulicami Maszkowska (przy granicy z miejscowością Helenów), następnie na zachód wzdłuż ulicy Granicznej do koryta rzeki Bzura dalej wzdłuż ul. Kochanowskiego do ul. Wodnej dalej ulicami: Adamówek, Sikorskiego, Działkowa, Słoneczna, Konopnickiej, Zielona od nr 15a w kierunku zachodnim do ul. Żytniej, na północ wzdłuż ul. Żytniej (w kierunku granicy z miejscowością Śliwniki) wzdłuż koryta rzeki Solanka, Wróblew, Parzyce, Muchówka, Tymienica, Ostrów, Dybówka, Cedrowice, Cedrowice-Parcela, Czerchów, Opalanki.
zawierające się w promieniu 3 km od współrzędnych GPS: 51.98213/19.29961
20.2.2025
PL-HPAI(P)-2025-00011
W województwie wielkopolskim w powiecie kolskim: 1. w gminie Grzegorzew miejscowości: Barłogi, Boguszyniec, Borysławice Zamkowe, Bylice Kolonia, Bylice Wieś, Grodna, Grzegorzew, Kiełczewek, Ponętów Dolny, Zabłocie;
w gminie Koło miejscowości: Kiełczew Górny, Kiełczew Smużny I, Wandynów.
22.2.2025
PL-HPAI(P)-2025-00012
W województwie wielkopolskim: 1. w powiecie kępińskim, w gminie Kępno, miejscowości: Mikorzyn, Mechnice, Domanin, Myjomice, Kierzenko, Ostrówiec, Kierzno, Pustkowie Kierzeńskie; 2. w powiecie ostrzeszowskim, w gminie Doruchów, miejscowość: Rudniczysko.
W województwie łódzkim, w powiecie wieruszowskim, w gminie Wieruszów miejscowość Jutrków.
21.2.2025
PL-HPAI(P)-2025-00013
PL-HPAI(P)-2025-00017
PL-HPAI(P)-2025-00018
W województwie wielkopolskim w powiecie kaliskim: 1. powiecie kaliskim, w gminie Opatówek, miejscowości: Dębe-Kolonia, Kobierno, Rożdżały, Tłokinia Kościelna, Tłokinia Mała, Tłokinia Wielka, Słoneczna, Frankowizna, Borów, Zmyślanka; 2. w powiecie kaliskim, w gminie Ceków-Kolonia, miejscowości: Beznatka, Kamień, Bystrek, Cierpiatka, Kamień-Kolonia, Korek, Magdalenów; 3. w powiecie kaliskim, w gminie Koźminek, miejscowości: Dębsko, Emilianów (wraz z Zosina), Tymianek, Pietrzyków, Smółki, Ksawerów, Marianów, Złotniki, Nowy Karolew, Gać Kaliska, Stary Karolew, Chodybki, Moskurnia, miasto Koźminek (wraz z Przydziałki, Słowiki, Warwarówka), Stary Nakwasin; 4. w powiecie kaliskim, w gminie Żelazków miejscowość: Dębe, Florentyna, Ilno, Pólko, Skarszew, Skarszewek; 5. w powiecie kaliskim, w gminie Lisków, miejscowość: Trzebienie, Ciepielew.
W województwie łódzkim, w powiecie sieradzkim:
—
w gminie Goszczanów, miejscowości: Sokołów, Sulmów, Wola Tłomakowa
Zawierające się w promieniu 3 km od współrzędnych GPS 51.785304/ 18.407166, 18
51.786618815/ 18.40688426
1.3.2025
PL-HPAI(P)-2025-00014
W województwie lubuskim, 1)
w powiecie nowosolskim, w gminie Kolsko, miejscowości: Konotop, Lipka 2)
w powiecie zielonogórskim, w gminie Bojadła, miejscowości: Pyrnik Młynkowo, Kartno, Susłów.
26.2.2025
PL-HPAI(P)-2025-00016
W województwie wielkopolskim w powiecie kaliskim:
gmina Szczytniki: Mroczki Wielkie
W województwie łódzkim w powiecie sieradzkim:
—
w gminie Goszczanów, miejscowości: Chlewo, Chwalęcice, Stojanów, Sulmówek, Świnice Kaliskie, Waliszewice, Wilkszyce
—
w gminie Błaszki, miejscowości: Kobylniki, Korzenica, Morawki, Nacesławice, Sędzimirowice
—
w gminie Warta, miejscowości: Krąków, Zielęcin
Zawierające się w promieniu 3 km od współrzędnych GPS: 51.74103/18.46314
1.3.2025

Member State: Portugal

ADIS reference number of the outbreak
Area comprising:
Date until applicable in accordance with Article 39 of Delegated Regulation (EU) 2020/687
PT-HPAI(P)-2025-00002
The parts from the county of Sintra, from the district of Lisboa, that are contained within circle of 3 kilometers radius, centered on GPS coordinates 38.905151N, -9.407569W
8.2.2025
PT-HPAI(NON-P)-2025-00001
The parts from the county of Caldas da Rainha, from the district of Leiria, that are contained within circle of 3 kilometers radius, centered on GPS coordinates 39.434184N, -9.142658W
14.2.2025
PT-HPAI(NON-P)-2025-00003
The parts from the counties of Albergaria-a-Velha, Aveiro and Estarreja, from the district of Aveiro, that are contained within circle of 3 kilometers radius, centered on GPS coordinates 40.675658N, -8.559449W
22.2.2025

Part B

Surveillance zones in the concerned Member States* as referred to in Article 1, point (a), and Article 3:

Member State: Belgium

ADIS reference number of the outbreak
Area comprising:
Date until applicable in accordance with Article 55 of Delegated Regulation (EU) 2020/687
Province: Liege
BE-HPAI(NON-P)-2025-00003
Those parts of the municipalities Ans, Bitsingen, Blegny, Chaudfontaine, Dalhem, Herve, Juprelle, Liège, Olne, Oupeye, Saint-Nicolas, Seraing, Soumagne, Trooz and Wezet extending beyond the area described in the protection zone and contained within a circle of a radius of 10 kilometres, centered on WGS84 dec. coordinates long 5,652532, lat 50,659096. 1.3.2025
Those parts of the municipalities Beyne-Heusay, Blegny, Herstal, Luik, Oupeye, Soumagne and Wezet contained within a circle of a radius of 3 kilometres, centered on WGS84 dec. coordinates long 5,652532, lat 50,659096
21.2.2025-1.3.2025

Member State: Bulgaria

ADIS reference number of the outbreak
Area comprising:
Date until applicable in accordance with Article 55 of Delegated Regulation (EU) 2020/687
Plovdiv region
BG-HPAI(P)-2025-00001
The following villages in Asenovgrad municipality:
—
Izbeglii
—
Kozanovo
—
Stoevo
—
Zlatovrah
—
Muldava
—
Lyaskovo
The following villages in Sadovo municipality:
—
Sadovo
—
Bolyartsi
—
Katunitsa
—
Karadzhovo
—
Kochevo
The following villages in Rodopi municipality:
—
Krumovo
—
Yagodovo
The following villages in Kuklen municipality:
—
Kuklen
—
Ruen
23.3.2025
The following villages in Asenovgrad municipality:
—
Asenovgrad
—
Boyantsi
The following villages in Sadovo municipality:
—
Mominsko
15.3.2025 – 23.3.2025

Member State: Germany

ADIS reference number of the outbreak
Area comprising:
Date until applicable in accordance with Article 55 of Delegated Regulation (EU) 2020/687
BADEN-WÜRTTEMBERG
DE-HPAI(P)-2025-00002
Landkreis Schwäbisch Hall
10 km um den Ausbruchsbetrieb mit den GPS-Koordinaten 9.901883/49.197328. Folgende Gebiete sind betroffen:
—
Gemeinde Blaufelden
Gebiet nördlich/nord-westlich von Raboldshausen
—
Gemeinde Braunsbach
Ortsteile Arnsdorf, Braunsbach, Bühlerzimmern, Dörrhof, Döttingen, Elzhausen, Geislingen am Kocher, Hergershof, Jungholzhausen, Orlach, Rückertsbronn, Rückertshausen, Schaalhof, Steinkirchen, Tierberg, Zottishofen
—
Stadt Crailsheim
Ortsteile Buch, Erkenbrechtshausen, Heinkenbusch, Maulach, Ölhaus, Rüddern, Saurach, Triensbach, Weilershof, Wollmershausen
—
Gemeinde Frankenhardt
Nörcliche Waldgebiete Burgberg
—
Stadt Gerabronn
Ortsteile Amlishagen, Binselberg, Brettachhöhe, Bügenstegen, Gerabronn, Großforst, Hammerschmiede, Himmelreichshof, Holderhof, Horschhof, Hubertushof, Hubertusmühle, Kleinforst, Kupferhof, Liebesdorf,
Michelbach an der Heide, Oberweiler, Rechenhausen, Rückershagen, Seibotenberg, Unterweiler, Ziegelhof
—
Stadt Ilshofen
Ortsteile Altenberg, Eckartshausen, Gaugshausen, Gebiet nördlich von Hessenau, Großstadel, Kerleweck, Kleinstadel, Lerchenmühle, Niedersteinach, Oberaspach, Oberscheffach, Oberschmerach, Söllbot, Steinbächle, Unteraspach, Unterschmerach, Windisch-Brachbach
—
Stadt Kirchberg/Jagst
Ortsteile Diembot, Eichenau, Gaggstatt, Hammerschmiede, Herboldshausen, Hornberg, Kirchberg an der Jagst, Lendsiedel, Lobenhausen, Mistlau, Schöneck, Waldeck, Weckelweiler
—
Stadt Langenburg
Ortsteile Atzenrod, Bächlingen, Großhürden, Kleinhürden, Langenburg, Ludwigsruhe, Nesselbach, Neuhof, Oberregenbach, Unterregenbach
—
Gemeinde Rot am See
Ortsteile Beimbach, Bemberg, Gewann Birkenfeld, Heroldhausen, Kleinbrettheim, LAuramühle, LEnkerstetten, Niederwinden, Oberndorf, Oberwinden, Rotmühle, Werdeck
—
Gemeinde Satteldorf
Ortsteile Bölgental
—
Stadt Schwäbisch Hall
Ortsteile Hohenstadt, Jagstrot, Neubronn, Otterbach, Ramsbach, Tüngental, Wolpertsdorf
—
Gemeinde Untermünkheim
Ortsteile Gebietsteile östliche Enslingen
—
Stadt Vellberg
Ortsteile Großaltdorf, Kleinaltdorf, Lorenzenzimmern
—
Gemeinde Wallhausen
Ortsteile Waldgebiet Teile Hornberger Wald
—
Gemeinde Wolpertshausen
Ortsteile Cröffelbach, Haßfelden, Heide, Hohenberg, Hopfach, Reinsberg, Rudelsdorf, Unterscheffach, Wolpertshausen
14.2.2025
Landkreis Schwäbisch Hall
3 km Radius um den Ausbruchsbetrieb mit den GPS-Koordinaten 9.901883/49.197328. Folgende Gebiete sind betroffen:
—
Stadt Gerabronn
Ortsteile Dünsbach, Elpershofen, Morstein
—
Stadt Ilshofen
Ortsteile Großallmerspann und Anteil der Gemarkung Eckartshausen nördlich der L1040 und L2218, Hessenau, Leofels, Obersteinach, Ruppertshofen, Sandelsbronn, Stadtgebiet Ilshofen und Gemarkun Ilshofen
—
Stadt Kirchberg an der Jagst
Ortsteile Dörrmenz und Anteile der Gemarkung Lendsiedel mit Ortsteil Kleinallmerspann und südwestliche Anteile zwischen L240 und BAB6
—
Gemeinde Wolpertshausen
Ortsteile Hörlebach, Landturm
6.2.2025 – 14.2.2025
NIEDERSACHSEN
DE-HPAI(P)-2025-00001
Landkreis Oldenburg
10 km Radius um den Ausbruchsbetrieb mit den GPS-Koordinaten 8.416550, 53.067303. Betroffen sind Teile der Gemeinden Dötlingen, Ganderkesee, Hatten und Hude.
Landkreis Wesermarsch
10 km Radius um den Ausbruchsbetrieb mit den GPS-Koordinaten 8.416550, 53.067303. Betroffen sind Teile der Gemeinde Berne
12.2.2025
Landkreis Oldenburg
3 km Radius um den Ausbruchsbetrieb mit den GPS-Koordinaten 8.416550, 53.067303. Betroffen sind Teile der Gemeinden Ganderkesee, Hatten und Hude.
4.2.2025-12.2.2025
DE-HPAI(P)-2025-00003
Landkreis Grafschaft Bentheim
10 km Radius um den Ausbruchsbetrieb mit den GPS-Koordinaten 6.979736, 52.585098. Betroffen sind Teile der Gemeinden Emlichheim, Esche, Georgsdorf, Gölenkamp, Hoogstede, Neuenhaus, Osterwald, Ringe, Uelsen, Wietmarschen, Wilsum und der Stadt Nordhorn
Landkreis Emsland
10 km Radius um den Ausbruchsbetrieb mit den GPS-Koordinaten 6.979736, 52.585098. Betroffen sind Teile der Gemeinden Geeste und Twist
24.2.2025
Landkreis Grafschaft Bentheim
3 km Radius um den Ausbruchsbetrieb mit den GPS-Koordinaten 6.979736, 52.585098. Betroffen sind Teile der Gemeinden Hoogstede, Osterwald und Ringe
16.2.2025-
24.2.2025
DE-HPAI(P)-2025-00004
Landkreis Aurich
10 km Radius um den Ausbruchsbetrieb mit den GPS-Koordinaten 7.612823, 53.484455. Betroffen sind Teile der Gemeinden Großefehn, Ihlow, Wiesmoor und der Stadt Aurich.
Landkreis Wittmund
10 km Radius um den Ausbruchsbetrieb mit den GPS-Koordinaten 7.612823, 53.484455. Betroffen sind Teile der Gemeinden Blomberg, Dunum, Friedeburg, Neuschoo und der Stadt Wittmund.
8.3.2025
Landkreis Aurich
3 km Radius um den Ausbruchsbetrieb mit den GPS-Koordinaten 7.612823, 53.484455. Betroffen sind Teile der Gemeinde Großefehn und der Stadt Aurich.
28.2.2025-
8.3.2025
DE-HPAI(P)-2025-00005
Landkreis Friesland
10 km Radius um den Ausbruchsbetrieb mit den GPS-Koordinaten 7.897797, 53.702855. Betroffen sind Teile der Gemeinden Wangerland und Wangerooge.
Landkreis Wittmund
10 km Radius um den Ausbruchsbetrieb mit den GPS-Koordinaten 7.897797, 53.702855. Betroffen sind Teile der Gemeinden Neuharlingersiel, Spiekeroog, Werdum und der Stadt Wittmund.
8.3.2025
Landkreis Friesland
3 km Radius um den Ausbruchsbetrieb mit den GPS-Koordinaten 7.897797, 53.702855. Betroffen sind Teile der Gemeinde Wangerland.
27.2.2025-
8.3.2025

Member State: Italy

ADIS reference number of the outbreak
Area comprising:
Date until applicable in accordance with Article 55 of Delegated Regulation (EU) 2020/687
Veneto region:
IT-HPAI(P)-2025-00005
The area of the parts of Veneto Region extending beyond the area described in the protection zone and within the circle of a radius of ten kilometres, centred on WGS84 dec. coordinates N 45.307217883, E 10.766098526
7.2.2025
The area of the parts of Veneto Region contained within a circle of radius of three kilometres, centred on WGS84 dec. coordinates N 45.307217883, E 10.766098526
30.1.2025-7.2.2025
IT-HPAI(P)-2025-00006
The area of the parts of Veneto Region extending beyond the area described in the protection zone and within the circle of a radius of ten kilometres, centred on WGS84 dec. coordinates N 45.298310102, E 10.853128524
8.2.2025
The area of the parts of Veneto Region contained within a circle of radius of three kilometres, centred on WGS84 dec. coordinates N 45.298310102, E 10.853128524
31.1.2025-8.2.2025
IT-HPAI(P)-2025-00007
The area of the parts of Veneto Region extending beyond the area described in the protection zone and within the circle of a radius of ten kilometres, centred on WGS84 dec. coordinates N 45.32054, E 10.72671
11.2.2025
The area of the parts of Veneto Region contained within a circle of radius of three kilometres, centred on WGS84 dec. coordinates N 45.32054, E 10.72671
3.2.2025-11.2.2025
IT-HPAI(P)-2025-00008
The area of the parts of Veneto Region extending beyond the area described in the protection zone and within the circle of a radius of ten kilometres, centred on WGS84 dec. coordinates N 45.248221855, E 10.916122239
12.2.2025
The area of the parts of Veneto Region contained within a circle of radius of three kilometres, centred on WGS84 dec. coordinates N 45.248221855, E 10.916122239
4.2.2025-12.2.2025
IT-HPAI(P)-2025-00012
The area of the parts of Veneto Region extending beyond the area described in the protection zone and within the circle of a radius of ten kilometres, centred on WGS84 dec. coordinates N 45.249597, E 10.937853
12.2.2025
The area of the parts of Veneto Region contained within a circle of radius of three kilometres, centred on WGS84 dec. coordinates N 45.249597, E 10.937853
4.2.2025-12.2.2025
IT-HPAI(P)-2025-00013
The area of the parts of Veneto Region extending beyond the area described in the protection zone and within the circle of a radius of ten kilometres, centred on WGS84 dec. coordinates N 45.253118, E 10.935808
12.2.2025
The area of the parts of Veneto Region contained within a circle of radius of three kilometres, centred on WGS84 dec. coordinates N 45.253118, E 10.935808
4.2.2025-12.2.2025
IT-HPAI(P)-2025-00014
The area of the parts of Veneto Region extending beyond the area described in the protection zone and within the circle of a radius of ten kilometres, centred on WGS84 dec. coordinates N 45.355299708, E 10.860377854
14.2.2025
The area of the parts of Veneto Region contained within a circle of radius of three kilometres, centred on WGS84 dec. coordinates N 45.355299708, E 10.860377854
6.2.2025-14.2.2025
IT-HPAI(P)-2025-00015
The area of the parts of Veneto Region extending beyond the area described in the protection zone and within the circle of a radius of ten kilometres, centred on WGS84 dec. coordinates N 45.387097, E 10.845679
16.2.2025
The area of the parts of Veneto Region contained within a circle of radius of three kilometres, centred on WGS84 dec. coordinates N 45.387097, E 10.845679
8.2.2025-16.2.2025
IT-HPAI(P)-2025-00016
The area of the parts of Veneto Region extending beyond the area described in the protection zone and within the circle of a radius of ten kilometres, centred on WGS84 dec. coordinates N 45.328305525, E 10.962802707
16.2.2025
The area of the parts of Veneto Region contained within a circle of radius of three kilometres, centred on WGS84 dec. coordinates N 45.328305525, E 10.962802707
8.2.2025-16.2.2025
IT- HPAI(P)-2025-00018
The area of the parts of Veneto Region extending beyond the area described in the protection zone and within the circle of a radius of ten kilometres, centred on WGS84 dec. coordinates N 45.307002212, E 10.924128439
6.3.2025
The area of the parts of Veneto Region contained within a circle of radius of three kilometres, centred on WGS84 dec. coordinates N 45.307002212, E 10.924128439
26.2.2025-6.3.2025
IT- HPAI(P)-2025-00019
The area of the parts of Veneto Region extending beyond the area described in the protection zone and within the circle of a radius of ten kilometres, centred on WGS84 dec. coordinates N 45.313221094, E 11.032151414
1.3.2025
The area of the parts of Veneto Region contained within a circle of radius of three kilometres, centred on WGS84 dec. coordinates N 45.313221094, E 11.032151414
21.2.2025-1.3.2025
IT- HPAI(P)-2025-00020
The area of the parts of Veneto Region extending beyond the area described in the protection zone and within the circle of a radius of ten kilometres, centred on WGS84 dec. coordinates N 45.416369117, E 10.788320732
5.3.2025
The area of the parts of Veneto Region contained within a circle of radius of three kilometres, centred on WGS84 dec. coordinates N 45.416369117, E 10.788320732
25.2.2025-5.3.2025
Lombardia region:
IT-HPAI(P)-2025-00001
The area of the parts of Lombardia Region extending beyond the area described in the protection zone and within the circle of a radius of ten kilometres, centred on WGS84 dec. coordinates N 45.297148, E 10.761502
16.2.2025
The area of the parts of Lombardia Region contained within a circle of radius of three kilometres, centred on WGS84 dec. coordinates N 45.297148, E 10.761502
8.2.2025-16.2.2025
IT-HPAI(P)-2025-00002
The area of the parts of Lombardia Region extending beyond the area described in the protection zone and within the circle of a radius of ten kilometres, centred on WGS84 dec. coordinates N 45.312173, E 10.785147
21.2.2025
The area of the parts of Lombardia Region contained within a circle of radius of three kilometres, centred on WGS84 dec. coordinates N 45.312173, E 10.785147
13.2.2025-21.2.2025
IT-HPAI(P)-2025-00003
The area of the parts of Lombardia Region extending beyond the area described in the protection zone and within the circle of a radius of ten kilometres, centred on WGS84 dec. coordinates N 45.289988, E 10.765221
20.2.2025
The area of the parts of Lombardia Region contained within a circle of radius of three kilometres, centred on WGS84 dec. coordinates N 45.289988, E 10.765221
12.2.2025-20.2.2025
IT-HPAI(P)-2025-00004
The area of the parts of Lombardia Region extending beyond the area described in the protection zone and within the circle of a radius of ten kilometres, centred on WGS84 dec. coordinates N 45.289456, E 10.758892
20.2.2025
The area of the parts of Lombardia Region contained within a circle of radius of three kilometres, centred on WGS84 dec. coordinates N 45.289456, E 10.758892
12.2.2025-20.2.2025
IT-HPAI(P)-2025-00009
The area of the parts of Lombardia Region extending beyond the area described in the protection zone and within the circle of a radius of ten kilometres, centred on WGS84 dec. coordinates N 45.295545, E 10.762689
22.2.2025
The area of the parts of Lombardia Region contained within a circle of radius of three kilometres, centred on WGS84 dec. coordinates N 45.295545, E 10.762689
14.2.2025-22.2.2025
IT-HPAI(P)-2025-00010
The area of the parts of Lombardia Region extending beyond the area described in the protection zone and within the circle of a radius of ten kilometres, centred on WGS84 dec. coordinates N 45.28669, E 10.780547
23.2.2025
The area of the parts of Lombardia Region contained within a circle of radius of three kilometres, centred on WGS84 dec. coordinates N 45.28669, E 10.780547
15.2.2025-23.2.2025
IT-HPAI(P)-2025-00011
The area of the parts of Lombardia Region extending beyond the area described in the protection zone and within the circle of a radius of ten kilometres, centred on WGS84 dec. coordinates N 45.2787, E 10.800989
16.2.2025
The area of the parts of Lombardia Region contained within a circle of radius of three kilometres, centred on WGS84 dec. coordinates N 45.2787, E 10.800989
8.2.2025-16.2.2025
IT-HPAI(P)-2025-00017
The area of the parts of Lombardia Region extending beyond the area described in the protection zone and within the circle of a radius of ten kilometres, centred on WGS84 dec. coordinates N 45.306725, E 10.794453
22.2.2025
The area of the parts of Lombardia contained within a circle of radius of three kilometres, centred on WGS84 dec. coordinates N 45.306725, E 10.794453
14.2.2025-22.2.2025
Piemonte region:
IT-HPAI(P)-2025-00021
The area of the parts of Piemonte Region extending beyond the area described in the protection zone and within the circle of a radius of ten kilometres, centred on WGS84 dec. coordinates N 45.184691, E 7.95224999
14.3.2025
The area of the parts of Piemonte Region contained within a circle of radius of three kilometres, centred on WGS84 dec. coordinates N 45.184691, E 7.95224999
6.3.2025-14.3.2025

Member State: Lithuania

ADIS reference number of the outbreak
Area comprising:
Date until applicable in accordance with Article 55 of Delegated Regulation (EU) 2020/687
LT-HPAI(P)-2025-00001
Klaipeda district municipality:
Agluonenai parish Vanagai village, Dreiziai village, Kantvainiai village, Agluonenai village, Azpurviai village, Grieziai village, Zagarai village, Poskai village, Saukliai village;
Priekule parish Drukiai village, Klisiai village, Svencele village, Birzininkai village, Kuodziai village, Venckai village, Gropiskiai village, Voveriskiai village, Stragnai I village, Stragnai II village, Kalviskiai village, Pangesai village, Priekule II village, Budvieciai village, Luzgaliai village, Pleskuciai village, Lingiai village, Joksai village, Pempes village, Mezeliu village, Priekule town, Priekule I village, Dreverna village, Sventvakariai village, Daugmantai village, Pjauliai village;
Veivirzenai parish Skomantai village, Dvyliai village, Luisiai village, Bilvietis village, Pozingiai village, Vyskupiskiai village, Sarkiskiai village, Pezaiciai village, Mikuziai village.
Silute district municipality:
Kintai parish Mockiai village, Paurai village, Sakuciai village, Kintai village, Kiskiai village, Zyniai village, Prycmai village, Kalviskiai village, Kiosiai village, Lamsociai village, Raudziai village;
Saugai parish. Aisenai village, Berciske village, Vytuliai village, Alkos village, Miestaliai village, Grynaiciai village, Petreliai village, Medaliai village, Diegliai village, Saugai village, Norkaiciai village, Zemaitkiemis village, Kukorai village, Bruzai village, Lasai village, Stonaiciai village;
Sveksna parish Inkakliai village, Jomantai village, Gailaiciai village, Jurgaiciai village, Mataiciai village, Zagatpurviai village, Virkytai village, Kalnalis village, Pociai village.
9.3.2025
Klaipeda district municipality Priekule parish Lankupiai village, Liaunai village, Grumbliai village, Silininkai village.
Silutes district municipality Saugu parish Pangiriai village, Sakuteliai village, Grumbliai village., Silininkai village, Ciuteliai village, Mantvydai village, Bundalai village, Stankaiciai village, Vilkmedziai village, Begedziai village, Kabeliai village, Lankupiai village, Vilkyciai village
1.3.2025 – 9.3.2025

Member State: Hungary

ADIS reference number of the outbreak
Area comprising:
Date until applicable in accordance with Article 55 of Delegated Regulation (EU) 2020/687
Békés vármegye
HU-HPAI(P)-2025-00002
Biharugra, Körösnagyharsány, Körösújfalu és Zsadány Zsáka települések közigazgatási területének a 47.020094 és a 21.493791 GPS-koordináták által meghatározott 10 km sugarú körön belül és védőkörzeten kívül eső területe.
14.2.2025
Szabolcs-Szatmár-Bereg vármegye
HU-HPAI(P)-2025-00001
Bátorliget, Encsencs, Kisléta, Máriapócs, Nyírbátor, Nyírbéltek, Nyírbogát, Nyírcsászári, Nyírderzs, Nyírgyulaj, Nyírkáta, Nyírpilis, Nyírvasvári, Ömböly, Piricse és Terem települések közigazgatási területének a 47.800570 és a 22.150850 GPS-koordináták által meghatározott 10 km sugarú körön belül és védőkörzeten kívül eső területe.
13.2.2025
Nyírbátor, Nyírpilis, Nyírvasvári és Piricse települések közigazgatási területének a 47.800570 és a 22.150850 GPS-koordináták által meghatározott pont körüli 3 km sugarú körön belül eső területe.
5.2.2025 – 13.2.2025
HU-HPAI(P)-2025-00003
Balkány, Bököny, Geszteréd, Nyírgelse, Nyírlugos, Nyírmihálydi és a Szakoly települések közigazgatási területének a a 47.684926 és a 21.866182 GPS-koordináták által meghatározott 10 km sugarú körön belül és védőkörzeten kívül eső területe.
18.2.2025
Balkány település közigazgatási területének a 47.684926 és a 21.866182 GPS-koordináták által meghatározott pont körüli 3 km sugarú körön belül eső területe.
10.2.2025 – 18.2.2025
Hajdú-Bihar vármegye
HU-HPAI(P)-2025-00002
Csökmő, Furta, Komádi, Körösszakál, Körösszegapáti, Magyarhomorog, Mezősas, Újiráz, Vekerd és Zsáka települések közigazgatási területének a 47.020094 és a 21.493791 GPS-koordináták által meghatározott 10 km sugarú körön belül és védőkörzeten kívül eső területe.
14.2.2025
Komádi és Magyarhomorog települések közigazgatási területének a 47.020094 és a 21.493791 GPS-koordináták által meghatározott pont körüli 3 km sugarú körön belül eső területe.
6.2.2025 – 14.2.2025
HU-HPAI(P)-2025-00003
Hajdúhadház, Hajdúsámson, Nyíracsád, Nyíradony és Nyírmártonfalva települések közigazgatási területének a 47.684926 és a 21.866182 GPS-koordináták által meghatározott 10 km sugarú körön belül és védőkörzeten kívül eső területe.
18.2.2025
Nyíradony település közigazgatási területének a 47.684926 és a 21.866182 GPS-koordináták által meghatározott pont körüli 3 km sugarú körön belül eső területe.
10.2.2025 – 18.2.2025
HU-HPAI(P)-2025-00004
HU-HPAI(P)-2025-00007
Bakonszeg, Báránd, Berettyóújfalu, Bihardancsháza, Biharnagybajom, Bihartorda, Földes, Kaba, Nagyrábé, Püspökladány, Sáp, Sárrétudvari, Szerep és Tetétlen települések közigazgatási területének a 47.255532, 21.321795, valamint a 47.288012 és a 21.284262 GPS-koordináták által meghatározott 10 km sugarú körön belül és védőkörzeten kívül eső területe.
18.3.2025
Báránd, Bihardancsháza, Földes Nagyrábé és Sáp települések közigazgatási területének a 47.255532, 21.321795 GPS-koordináták által meghatározott pont körüli 3 km sugarú körön belül eső területe.
10.3.2025 – 18.3.2025
Heves vármegye
HU-HPAI(P)-2025-00005
Átány, Boconád, Dormánd, Erdőtelek, Heves, Hevesvezekény, Kál, Kompolt, Kömlő, Pély, Tarnabod, Tarnaméra, Tarnazsadány és Tenk települések közigazgatási területének a 47.623310 és a 20.285607 GPS-koordináták által meghatározott 10 km sugarú körön belül és védőkörzeten kívül eső területe.
3.3.2025
Átány, Heves települések közigazgatási területének a 47.623310 és a 20.285607 GPS-koordináták által meghatározott pont körüli 3 km sugarú körön belül eső területe.
23.2.2025 – 3.3.2025
Jász-Nagykun-Szolnok vármegye
HU-HPAI(P)-2025-00005
Jászivány és a Jászszentandrás települések közigazgatási területének a 47.623310 és a 20.285607 GPS-koordináták által meghatározott 10 km sugarú körön belül eső területe.
3.3.2025
Pest vármegye
HU-HPAI(P)-2025-00006
Aszód, Bag, Domony, Erdőkertes, Galgagyörk, Galgahévíz, Galgamácsa, Gödöllő, Hévízgyörk, Iklad, Isaszeg, Kartal, Kerepes, Mogyoród, Őrbottyán, Szada, Vácegres, Váckisújfalu, Vácszentlászló, Valkó és Veresegyház települések közigazgatási területének a 47.621000 és a 19.383500 GPS-koordináták által meghatározott 10 km sugarú körön belül és védőkörzeten kívül eső területe.
4.3.2025
Bag, Domony, Gödöllő és Veresegyház közigazgatási területének a 47.621000 és a 19.383500 GPS-koordináták által meghatározott pont körüli 3 km sugarú körön belül eső területe.
24.2.2025 – 4.3.2025

Member State: Netherlands

ADIS reference number of the outbreak
Area comprising:
Date until applicable in accordance with Article 55 of Delegated Regulation (EU) 2020/687
Province: Drenthe
DE-HPAI(P)-2025-00003
Those parts of the province Drenthe contained within a circle of a radius of 10 kilometres, centered on WGS84 dec. coordinates long 6.98 lat 52.59
24.2.2025

NL-HPAI(P)-2025-00005
Those parts of the Municipality Súdwest Fryslan in the province of Friesland extending beyond the area described in the protection zone and contained within a circle of a radius of 10 kilometres, centered on WGS84 dec. coordinates long 5.431 / lat 53.049
2.3.2025
Those parts of the Municipality Súdwest Fryslan in the province of Friesland contained within a circle of a radius of 3 kilometres, centered on WGS84 dec. coordinates long 5.431 / lat 53.049
22.2.2025 -2.3.2025

Member State: Poland

ADIS reference number of the outbreak
Area comprising:
Date until applicable in accordance with Article 55 of Delegated Regulation (EU) 2020/687
PL-HPAI(P)-2025-00001
woj. łódzkie:
—
powiat: sieradzki
gmina Błaszki: Adamki, Chabierów, Garbów, Gorzałów, Kalinowa, Kobylniki, Kociołki, Kwasków, Orzeżyn, Równa, Tuwalczew, Domaniew, Chociszew
gmina Goszczanów: Poprężniki, Wacławów, Gawłowice, Poradzew
gmina Warta: Augustynów, Chorążka, Cielce, Czartki, Gać Warcka, Glinno, Góra, Grzybki, Józefów Wiktorów, Krąków, Miedze, Lasek, Miedźno, Mikołajewice, Pierzchnia Góra, Proboszczowice, Raczków, Raszelki, Rossoszyca, Socha, Socha Kolonia, Tądów Dolny, Tądów Górny, Tomisławice, Ustków, Witów, Wola Zadąbrowska Nowa, Wola Zadąbrowska Stara, Zadąbrowie Wiatraczyska, Zielęcin, Kawęczynek, Upuszczew, Głaniszew, Kamionacz, Kamionacz Poduchowny, Nobela, Zakrzew
gmina Wróblew: Dziebędów, Inczew, Kościerzyn, Ocin, Próchna, Sędzice, Słomków Mokry, Słomków Suchy, Smardzew, Tubądzin, Kobierzycko, Wróblew, Dąbrówka, Bliźniew,
-powiat: poddębicki
gmina Pęczniew: Brodnia, Brodnia Kolonia, Brzeg, Dabrowa Lubolska, Jadwichna, Lubola, Zagórki,
zawierające się w promieniu 10 km od współrzędnych GPS: 51,69097/ 18,63163
9.2.2025
—
woj łódzkie:
powiat: sieradzki
gmina Warta: Bartochów, Baszków, Duszniki, Dzierzązna, Gołuchy, Jakubice, Łabędzie, Małków, Warta, Włyń, Zagajew, Kamionacz obszar leśny
zawierające się w promieniu 3 km od współrzędnych GPS: 51,69097/ 18,63163
1.2.2025-9.2.2025
PL-HPAI(P)-2025-00002
PL-HPAI(P)-2025-00007
PL-HPAI(P)-2025-00015
W województwie mazowieckim: 1)
W powiecie żuromińskim a)
w gminie Bieżuń, miejscowości: Adamowo, Bieżuń część miejscowości ograniczonej drogą krajową nr 541, ulicą Lawendową oraz ulicą Płocką, Dąbrówki z wyjątkiem części miejscowości na wschód od drogi krajowej 561 oraz na północ od odnogi rzeki Wkra, Gołuszyn z wyjątkiem części miejscowości na południowy zachód od rzeki Dopływ spod Stawiszyna, Mak, Małocin, Pełki, Pozga, Sławęcin z wyjątkiem części miejscowości na zachód od rzeki Dopływ spod Stawiszyna, Stanisławowo, Stawiszyn-Zwalewo, Trzaski, Wieluń-Zalesie, Wilewo, Władysławowo, Zgliczyn Pobodzy, b)
w gminie Siemiątkowo, miejscowości: Antoniewo, Dzieczewo, Nowa Wieś, Nowopole, Rostowa, Siemiątkowo, Siciarz, Siemiątkowo-Rogale, Sokołowy Kąt, Suwaki, c)
w gminie Kuczbork-Osada: Chodubka część miejscowości na południe od ul. Szreńskiej, Olszewko, Zielona. d)
w gminie Lutocin, miejscowości: Chromakowo, Dębówka, Elżbiecin, Felcyn, Jonne, Lutocin za wyjątkiem części miejscowości ograniczonej ul. Sierpecką i drogą gminną nr 628, Mojnowo, Obręb, Parlin, Przeradz Mały, Przeradz Nowy, Przeradz Wielki, Seroki, Swojęcin, Siemcichy, Zimolza, e)
w gminie Lubowidz, miejscowości: Bądzyn, f)
w gminie Żuromin, miejscowości: Brudnice, Będzymin, Cierpigórz, część miejscowości Chamsk ograniczonej na zachód drogą krajową nr 541, na południe ul. Wyzwolenia oraz na wschód ulicą Mazowiecką aż do granicy miejscowości, Dąbrowa, Dębsk, Franciszkowo część miejscowości na północ od ul. Ponad Lasem , Kosewo, Kliczewo Małe, Kliczewo Duże, Kruszewo, Nowe Nadratowo, Olszewo, Poniatowo, Raczyny, Rozwozin, Rzężawy Sadowo, Wiadrowo, Wólka Kliczewska, Stare Nadratowo, g)
w gminie Żuromin: miasto Żuromin; 2)
w powiecie sierpeckim: a)
w gminie Zawidz, miejscowości: Jaworowo-Kolonia, Jaworowo-Kłódź, Jaworowo-Lipa, Kosemin, b)
w gminie Rościszewo, miejscowości: Lipniki na północny wschód od rzeki Dopływ spod Władysławowa, Ostrów, Polik, Rumunki-Chwały, Rzeszotary- Chwały, Rzeszotary, Rumunki-Stara Wieś, Rzeszotary-Zawady, Września; 3)
w powiecie mławskim: a)
w gminie Radzanów, miejscowości: Bojanowo, Cegielnia Ratowska na zachód od drogi pomiędzy miejscowościami Bielawy i Ratowo, część miejscowości Radzanów ograniczonej od wschodu rzeką Wkrą do ulicy Mławskiej, następnie ulicą Mławską do skrzyżowania z ulicą Raciążską oraz wzdłuż ulicy Raciążskiej aż do granicy miejscowości, Ratowo, Zgliczyn- Glinki, Zgliczyn Witowy, b)
w gminie Szreńsk, miejscowości: Pączkowo, Sławkowo, Ługi, Miłotki.
6.3.2025
W województwie mazowieckim:
powiat żuromiński: a)
w gminie Bieżuń, miejscowości: Bielawy Gołuskie, Dąbrówki na wschód od drogi krajowej 561 oraz na północ od odnogi rzeki Wkra, Dźwierzno, Gołuszyn na południowy zachód od rzeki Dopływ spod Stawiszyna, Karniszyn, Karniszyn-Parcele, Kobyla Łąka, Kocewo, Myślin, Sadłowo, Sadłowo-Parcele, Stawiszyn-Łaziska, Sławęcin na zachód od rzeki Dopływ spod Stawiszyna oraz miasto Bieżuń z wyjątkiem części miejscowości ograniczonej drogą krajową nr 541, ulicą Lawendową oraz ulicą Płocką, Strzeszewo; b)
w gminie Żuromin, miejscowości: Chamsk z wyjątkiem części miejscowości ograniczonej na zachód drogą krajową nr 541, na południe ul. Wyzwolenia oraz na wschód ulicą Mazowiecką aż do granicy miejscowości, Franciszkowo za wyjątkiem części miejscowości na północ od ul. Ponad Lasem, Młudzyn.
26.2.2025-06.3.2025
PL-HPAI(NON-P)-2025-00004
W województwie podkarpackim, w powiecie jarosławskim: 1)
Boratyn, Chłopice, Dobkowice, Jankowice, Lutków, Łowce, Zamiechów w gminie Chłopice; 2)
Jarosław w gminie miejskiej Jarosław; 3)
Makowisko, Morawsko i Pełkinie w gminie wiejskiej Jarosław; 4)
Bobrówka, Charytany, Korzenica, Laszki, Wietlin Pierwszy, Wietlin Trzeci, Wysocko w gminie Laszki; 5)
Kidałowice, Maleniska, Pawłosiów, Tywonia, Widna Góra, Wierzbna w gminie Pawłosiów; 6)
Radymno w gminie miejskiej Radymno; 7)
Duńkowice, Łazy, Michałówka, Ostrów, Skołoszów, Święte, Zamojsce w gminie wiejskiej Radymno; 8)
Cetula, Piwoda, Radawa, Ryszkowa Wola, Szówsko, Wiązownica, Zapałów w gminie Wiązownica.
20.2.2025
W województwie podkarpackim, w powiecie jarosławskim: 1)
Surochów, Koniaczów, Munina, Sobiecin, Tuczempy, Zgoda w gminie wiejskiej Jarosław; 2)
Wietlin w gminie Laszki; 3)
Ostrów w gminie Radymno.
12.2.2025 -20.2.2025
PL-HPAI(P)-2025-00003
W województwie warmińsko-mazurskim: 1. powiat giżycki:
a.
gmina Giżycko: Bogaczewo, Guty, Kamionki, Kozin, Szczybały Giżyckie, Wilkaski, Wilkasy, Wronka, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Antonowo na zachód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowość Sztynort Mały i Rondo im. św. Jana Pawła II w Giżycku, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Bogacko na północ od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Kronowo i Wrony, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Wrony na wschód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Kamionki i Jagodne Małe;
b.
gmina Miłki: w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Jagodne Wielkie na północ od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Prażmowo i Grajwo;
c.
gmina Ryn: Knis, miasto Ryn, Orło, Prażmowo, Skop, Tros, Rudówka, Ryn, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Jeziorko na południe od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Orło i Szczybały Giżyckie, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Kronowo na północ od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Bałowo i Kamionki, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Krzyżany na wschód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Rybical i Koczarki, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Ławki na północ od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Rybical i Prażmowo, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Rybical na północ od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Słabowo i Ławki, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Wejdyki na wschód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Rybical i Krzyżany;
d.
w granicach administracyjnych miasta Giżycko na zachód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Antonowo i Kleszczewo-Osada. 2. powiat kętrzyński:
a.
gmina Kętrzyn: Bałowo, Martiany, Osewo, Parcz, Pożarki, Salpik, Sykstyny, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Czerniki na wschód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Godzikowo i Jankowo, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Koczarki na wschód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Krzyżany i Nakomiady, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Kwiedzina na wschód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Godzikowo i Jankowo, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Nakomiady na wschód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Koczarki i Kwiedzina, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Wajsznory na wschód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Koczarki i Kwiedzina. 3. powiat węgorzewski:
a.
gmina Węgorzewo: w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Pilwa na południe od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Jankowo i Harsz.
25.2.2025
W województwie warmińsko-mazurskim: 1. powiat giżycki:
a.
gmina Giżycko: Sterławki Małe, Sterławki Średnie, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Bogacko na południe od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Kronowo i Wrony, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Wrony na zachód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Kamionki i Jagodne Małe;
b.
gmina Ryn: Sterławki Wielkie, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Jeziorko na północ od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Orło i Szczybały Giżyckie, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Kronowo na południe od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Bałowo i Kamionki.
17.2.2025 -25.2.2025
PL-HPAI(P)-2025-00004
Obszar zagrożony
W województwie zachodniopomorskim: 1. Część gminy Osina w powiecie goleniowskim 2. Cześć gminy Nowogard w powiecie goleniowskim 3. Część gminy Maszewo w powiecie goleniowskim 4. Część gminy Goleniów w powiecie goleniowskim 5. Część gminy Dobra w powiecie łobeskim
Zawierający się w promieniu 10 km od współrzędnych
53.58037
15.06903
26.2.2025
Obszar zapowietrzony w województwie zachodniopomorskim: 1. Część gminy Osina w powiecie goleniowskim, 2. Część gminy Nowogard w powiecie goleniowskim 3. Część gminy Maszewo w powiecie goleniowskim
Zawierający się w promieniu 3 km od współrzędnych
53.58037
15.06903
18.2.2025 -26.2.2025
PL-HPAI(P)-2025-00005
woj. łódzkie:
—
powiat kutnowski;
gmina Kutno: Miasto Kutno Woźniaków, Grabków, Boża Wola, Byszew, Byszew-Kaczyn, Florek, Gnojno, Gołębiew Nowy, Gołębiew Stary, Głogowiec, Julinki, Leszczynek, Leszno, Malina, Marianki, Nowa Wieś, Nagodów, Piwki, Dudki, Raciborów, Sieciechów, Stanisławów, Wierzbie, Wysoka Wielka, Żurawieniec, Michałów, Kuczków, Wysoka Duża, Kolonia Sójki, Nowe Sójki, Kalinowa, Włosków, Dębina, Kuczków, Adamowice od nr 33 przy drodze krajowej numer 92 (Krośniewicka) w kierunku Miasta Kutno, Siemiennik;
—
powiat kutnowski;
gmina Łanięta: Chrosno, Chruścinek, Klonowiec Wielki, Suchodębie, Wilkowia, Ryszardów, Wola Chruścińska, Świeciny, Kliny, Lipie, Świecinki, Bronisławów, Marianów
—
powiat kutnowski;
gmina Nowe Ostrowy: Grodno, Imielinek, Imielno, Kołomia, Lipiny, Miksztal, Niechcianów, Nowe Ostrowy, Ostrowy, Wola Pierowa, Zieleniec, Nowa Wieś, Rdutów, Błota, Nowe Grodno, Ostrowy PGR;
—
powiat kutnowski;
gmina Strzelce: Klonowiec Stary, Siemianów, Sójki, Wieszczyce, Wola Raciborowska, Zgórze, Sójki – Parcel;
—
powiat kutnowski;
gmina Krośniewice – miasto: Krośniewice, Błonie, Kajew, Bardzinek, Krzewie, Kopy, Teresin, Pniewko, Ostałów, Tumidaj, Głaznów, Raszynek, Bielice, Stara Wieś, Górki Miłońskie, Miłonice, Jankowice, Franki, Kopyta, Wychny Parcela, Suchodoły, Głogowa, Cudniki, Miłosna, Wola Nowska, Godzięby, Luboradz, Wychny, Wymysłów, Zieleniew, Zalesie, Marynin, Nowe Jankowice, Morawce, Iwiczna do nr 29 w kierunku miejscowości Krośniewice, Pomarzany od nr 36 w kierunku miejscowości Krośniewice, Pawlikowice do nr 21 w kierunku miejscowości Krośniewice
—
powiat kutnowski;
gmina Dąbrowice: Ostrówki;
—
powiat kutnowski;
gmina Krzyżanów: Wojciechowice Duże, Zawady;
powiat łęczycki;
gmina Witonia: Budki Kostusin, Gozdków, Józinki, Olesice, Romartów, Rudniki, Szamów, Uwielinek Folwark, , Wargawa Stara, Wargawka Młoda, Witonia;
—
powiat łęczycki;
gmina Daszyna: Jarochów, Lipówka, Mazew, Ogrodzona, Osędowice, Rzędków, Nowa Żelazna, Stara Żelazna
zawierające się w promieniu 10 km od współrzędnych GPS: 52.2460533453/19.2526209874
26.2.2025
—
woj łódzkie :
—
powiat kutnowski, gmina Kutno: Gołębiewek Nowy, Gołębiewek Stary, Krzesin, Wroczyny, Ryków, Krzesin – Parcela, Krzesinówek, Adamów, Adamowice od ul. Krośniewickiej 33 w kierunku miejscowości Skłóty, Podczachy, Franki Wroczyńskie;
—
powiat kutnowski, gmina Nowe Ostrowy: Grochów, Wołodrza, Grochówek, Kały – Towarzystwo, Perna;
—
powiat kutnowski, gmina Krośniewice: Nowe, Skłóty, Szubina, Szubsk Duży, Witów, Szubsk – Towarzystwo, Cygany, Pomarzany od nr 36 w kierunku miejscowości Szubina, Pawlikowice od nr 22 w kierunku miejscowości Nowe, Iwiczna od nr 29 w kierunku miejscowości Skłóty
zawierające się w promieniu 3 km od współrzędnych GPS: 52.2460533453/ 19.2526209874
18.2.2025- 26.2.2025
PL-HPAI(P)-2025-00006
W województwie warmińsko-mazurskim: 1. powiat iławski:
a.
gmina Iława: Mózgowo, Zazdrość, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Gałdowo na zachód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Gulb i Krzywiec, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Gulb na zachód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Szwarcenowo i Gałdowo.
b.
gmina Kisielice: Biskupiczki, Butowo, Galinowo, Jędrychowo, Klimy, Łęgowo, Nowy Folwark, Pławty Wielkie, Stary Folwark, Trupel, Wola, w granicach administracyjnych miasta Kisielice na północ od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Limża i Wola, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Limża na północ od drogi krajowej nr 16, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Łodygowo na północ od drogi krajowej nr 16, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Ogrodzieniec na północ od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Trumieje i Trupel, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Sobiewola na północ od drogi krajowej nr 16. c.
gmina Susz: w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Wądoły na południe od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Grodziec i Krzywiec. 2. powiat nowomiejski
a.
gmina Biskupiec: Biskupiec, Fitowo, Osówko, Piotrowice, Podlasek, Podlasek Mały, Sędzice, Słupnica, Sumin, Wielka Tymawa, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Czachówki na zachód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Fitowo i Wielka Wólka, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Lipinki na północ od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Mierzyn i Sędzice, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Szwarcenowo na zachód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Czachówki i Gulb.
W województwie kujawsko – pomorskim: 1. powiat grudziądzki:
a.
gmina Łasin: Zawda, Szynwałd, Strzelce, Huta Strzelce, Nowe Jankowice, Jankowice, Gordanowo, Zawdzka Wola, Kozłowo, Plesewo Święte, Szonowo Szlacheckie, Goczałki, Łasin Wybudowanie
b.
gmina Świecie nad Osą: Partęczyny
W województwie pomorskim: 1. powiat kwidzyński:
a.
gmina Prabuty: Grodziec
b.
gmina Gardeja: Wracławek, Trumieje, Wilkowo, Pawłowo
25.2.2025
W województwie warmińsko-mazurskim: 1. powiat iławski:
a.
gmina Kisielice: Byliny, Goryń, Kantowo, Krzywka, Wałdowo, w granicach administracyjnych miasta Kisielice na południe od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Limża i Wola, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Limża na południe od drogi krajowej nr 16, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Łodygowo na południe od drogi krajowej nr 16, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Ogrodzieniec na południe od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Trumieje i Trupel, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Sobiewola na południe od drogi krajowej nr 16. 17.2.2025 – 25.2.2025
PL-HPAI(P)-2025-00008
W województwie warmińsko-mazurskim: 1. powiat giżycki:
a.
gmina Giżycko: Bogacko, Grajwo, Guty, Kamionki, Kąp, Kożuchy Wielkie, Pieczonki, Wrony, Sołdany, Sulimy, Szczybały Giżyckie, Upałty Małe, Wilkaski, Wilkasy, Wronka, Wrony, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Bogaczewo na północ od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Rydzewo i Bałowo, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Kruklin na zachód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Brożówka i Staświny, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Spytkowo na wschód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Świdry i Kożuchy Wielkie, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Sterławki Małe na wschód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Skop i Skrzypy;
b.
gmina Miłki: w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Kleszczewo na północ od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Kozin i Ruda, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Rydzewo na północ od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Kozin i Ruda, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Staświny na północ od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Siedliska i Kozin;
c.
gmina Kruklanki: w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Kruklanki na zachód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Stręgielek i Szczepanki. 2. powiat węgorzewski:
a.
gmina Pozezdrze: Harsz, Kolonia Pozezdrze, Pieczarki, Wyłudy, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Pozezdrze na południe od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Wyłudy i Okowizna;
b.
gmina Węgorzewo: w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Łabapa na południe od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Kolonia Rybacka i Skrzypy, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Sztynort Duży na południe od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Kolonia Rybacka i Skrzypy.
26.2.2025
W województwie warmińsko-mazurskim: 1. powiat giżycki:
a.
gmina Giżycko: Antonowo, Gajewo, Świdry, w granicach administracyjnych miejscowości Spytkowo na zachód od linii poprowadzonej przez miejscowości Świdry i Kożuchy Wielkie;
b.
miasto Giżycko.
18.2.2025 -26.2.2025
PL-HPAI(P)-2025-00009
W województwie podkarpackim: 1)
Wola Ociecka, Blizna, Kamionka, Borek Mały w gminie Ostrów, powiat ropczycko-sędziszowski; 2)
Ruda, Cierpisz, Czarna Sędziszowska, Boreczek, Sędziszów Małopolski oprócz osiedla Kawęczyn Sędziszowski, Góra Ropczycka w gminie Sędziszów Małopolski, powiat ropczycko-sędziszowski; 3)
Ropczyce – oprócz osiedla Pietrzejowa, Gnojnica, Okonin, Łączki Kucharskie, Brzezówka, Lubzina w gminie Ropczyce, powiat ropczycko-sędziszowski; 4)
Pustków, Pustków Osiedle, Pustynia, Kozłów, Brzeźnica, Paszczyna, Zawada, Stobierna w gminie Dębica, powiat dębicki; 5)
Bobrowa Wola, Bobrowa, Korzeniów w gminie Żyraków, powiat dębicki; 6)
Biały Bór, Tuszyma, Dobrynin w gminie Przecław, powiat mielecki; 7)
Niwiska, Hucisko, Leszcze w gminie Niwiska, powiat kolbuszowski.
3.3.2025
W województwie podkarpackim: 1)
Ostrów, Kozodrza, Skrzyszów, Ocieka, Zdżary w gminie Ostrów, powiat ropczycko-sędziszowski; 2)
Ropczyce – osiedle Pietrzejowa w gminie Ropczyce, powiat ropczycko-sędziszowski; 3)
Kochanówka w gminie Dębica, powiat dębicki.
23.2.2025-3.3.2025
PL-HPAI(P)-2025-00010
woj. łódzkie:
—
powiat zgierski;
gmina Zgierz: Śladków Górny, Brachowice, Astachowice, Kotowice, Dzierżązna, Kania Góra, Emilia, Rosanów, Słowik, Grotniki, Krzemień, Ustronie, Wiktorów, Adolfów, Dębniak, Ciosny, Jasionka, Ostrów, Swoboda, Bądków, Gieczno (po zachodniej części drogi wojewódzkiej 702), Rogoźno (po zachodniej części drogi wojewódzkiej 702), Grabiszew, Wypychów, Warszyce na zachód od numeru 24, Lućmierz Las (od południowej granicy lasu przy drodze ekspresowej S14 w kierunku północnym do autostrady A2).
gmina Ozorków: Sokolniki-Las, Katarzynów, Celestynów, Śliwniki, Aleksandria, Ozorków na południe wzdłuż ul. Granicznej do granicy z korytem rzeki Starówka, dalej wzdłuż ul. Kochanowskiego do ul. Wodnej dalej ulicami: Adamówek, Sikorskiego, Działkowa, Słoneczna, Konopnickiej, Zielona od nr 15a w kierunku zachodnim do ul. Żytniej, na północ wzdłuż ul. Żytniej (w kierunku granicy z miejscowością Śliwniki) wzdłuż koryta rzeki, Pełczyska Solca Wielka, Solca Mała, Sierpów, Wielka Wieś, Modlna, Leśmierz, Konary, Tkaczew, Skromnica, Borszyn
gmina Parzęczew: Opole, Leźnica Wielka-Osiedle, Leźnica Wielka, Kozikówka, Różyce Żmijowe, Trojany, Sulimy, Mrożewice, Różyce, Chrząstówek, Chrząstów Wielki, Stary Chrząstów, Śniatowa, Parzęczew, Gołaszyny, Ignacew Folwarczny, Ignacew Parzęczewski, Ignacew Rozlazły, Ignacew Podleśny, Florentynów, Nowa Jerozolima, Mikołajew, Sokola Góra, Nowomłyny, Tkaczewska Góra, Mariampol, Radzibórz, Duraj, Pustkowa Góra, Orła, Chociszew, Kowalewice, Mamień, Florianki, Julianki, Konstantki, Piaskowice, Wytrzyszczki, Bibianów, Żelgoszcz, Wielka Wieś, Janów, Mrożewice.
—
powiat łęczycki;
gmina Góra Św. Małgorzaty: Kwiatkówek, Tum, Mętlew, Mierczyn, Witaszewice, Marynki, Góra Świętej Małgorzaty, Kosin, Ambrożew, Orszewice, Nowy Gaj, Stary Gaj, Bryski, Bryski-Kolonia, Karsznice, Moraków, Janów, Bogdańczew, Kosiorów, Podgórzyce, Michałowice.
gmina Piątek: Żabokrzeki, Mchowice, Śladków Podleśny, Śladków Rozlazły, Dunaj, Czerników i Mysłówka do granicy z Buguszycami, wzdłuż koryta rzeki Dunaj do nr 30 Mysłówka, następnie na południe do drogi Boguszyce nr 47, dalej drogą do miejscowości Sypin nr 17 następnie do koryta rzeki Moszczenica i na południe do granicy z gminą Zgierz (miejscowość Gieczno).
gmina Łęczyca:
Topola Katowa, Lubień, Borki, Dzierzbiętów Duży, Dzierzbiętów Mały, miasto Łęczyca.
zawierające się w promieniu 10 km od współrzędnych GPS: 51.98213/19.29961
1.3.2025
woj łódzkie:
—
powiat zgierski;
gmina Ozorków: Boczki, Skotniki, Małachowice, Małachowice-Kolonia, Sokolniki-Parcela, Sokolniki, Maszkowice, Helenów, Ozorków na północ ulicami Maszkowska (przy granicy z miejscowością Helenów), następnie na zachód wzdłuż ulicy Granicznej do koryta rzeki Bzura dalej wzdłuż ul. Kochanowskiego do ul. Wodnej dalej ulicami: Adamówek, Sikorskiego, Działkowa, Słoneczna, Konopnickiej, Zielona od nr 15a w kierunku zachodnim do ul. Żytniej, na północ wzdłuż ul. Żytniej (w kierunku granicy z miejscowością Śliwniki) wzdłuż koryta rzeki Solanka, Wróblew, Parzyce, Muchówka, Tymienica, Ostrów, Dybówka, Cedrowice, Cedrowice-Parcela, Czerchów, Opalanki.
zawierające się w promieniu 3 km od współrzędnych GPS: 51.98213/19.29961
21.2.2025-1.3.2025
PL-HPAI(P)-2025-00011
W województwie wielkopolskim, w powiecie kolskim: 1. w gminie Olszówka, miejscowości: Adamin, Umień, Złota, Łubianka, Szczepanów, Ostrów Kolonia, Głębokie, Krzewata, Tomaszew, Zawadka, Olszówka, Drzewce, Ponętów Górny; 2. w gminie Kłodawa, miejscowości: Bierzwienna Długa Kolonia, Bierzwienna Długa Wieś, Bierzwienna, Krótka, Cząstków, Dąbrówka, Górki, Janczewy, Korzecznik, Krzykosy, Kłodawa, Leszcze, Luboniek, Okoleniec, Pomarzany, Rysiny, Rysiny Kolonia, Tarnówka, Słupeczka; 3. w gminie Koło, miejscowości: Aleksandrówka, Chojny, Czołowo, Dąbrowa, Kaczyniec, Kamień, Kiełczew, Smużny Czwarty, Leśnica, Lucjanowo, Mikołajówek, Powiercie Kolonia, Powiercie Wieś, Przybyłów, Ruchenna, Skobielice, Sokołowo, Wrząca Wielka; 4. w gminie Kościelec miejscowości: Ruszków Pierwszy, Ruszków Drugi, Dobrów; 5. w gminie Babiak, miejscowości: Dębno Królewskie, Dębno Poproboszczowskie, Kiejsze, Korzecznik –
Podlesie, Lipie Góry, Maliniec, Nowiny Brdowskie, Osówie, Podkiejsze; 6. w gminie Osiek Mały, miejscowości: Borecznia Mała, Borecznia Wielka, Felicjanów, Hilarów, Osiek Wielki; 7. w gminie Dąbie miejscowości: Ladorudz, Majdany, Rzuchów, Grabina Wielka; 8. w gminie Grzegorzew miejscowości: Ladorudzek, Tarnówka, Borysławice Kościelne; 9. Miasto Koło
3.3.2025
W województwie wielkopolskim w powiecie kolskim: 1. w gminie Grzegorzew miejscowości: Barłogi, Boguszyniec, Borysławice Zamkowe, Bylice Kolonia, Bylice Wieś, Grodna, Grzegorzew, Kiełczewek, Ponętów Dolny, Zabłocie; 2. w gminie Koło miejscowości: Kiełczew Górny, Kiełczew Smużny I, Wandynów.
23.2.2025-3.3.2025
PL-HPAI(P)-2025-00012
W województwie wielkopolskim: 1. w powiecie kępińskim, w gminie Kępno, miejscowości: Rzetnia, Przybyszów, Szklarka Mielęcka, Dziekania, Zosin, Osiny, Kliny, Kępno, Hanulin, Krążkowy, Biały Młyn, Mianowice, Olszowa, Świba; 2. w powiecie kępińskim, w gminie Bralin, miejscowości: Chojęcin, Chojęcin-Szum, Weronikopole; 3. w powiecie kępińskim, w gminie Baranów, miejscowości: Baranów, Jankowy, Donaborów, 4. w powiecie ostrzeszowskim, w gminie Ostrzeszów, miejscowości: Turze, Kochłowy, Malinów, Źródelnia, Dobra, Wiązownia, Królewskie, Olszyna, Ostrzeszów, Ostrzeszów Pustkowie, Rogaszyce; 5. w powiecie ostrzeszowskim, w gminie Kobyla Góra, miejscowości: Zmyślona Parzynowska, Parzynów, Osiny; 6. w powiecie ostrzeszowskim, w gminie Doruchów, miejscowości: Wygoda Tokarska, Tokarzew, Pieczyska, Godziętowy, Przytocznica, Doruchów, Stara Kuźnica, Zalesie, Gruszków, Pyki, Wygoda Plugawska, Mieleszówka, Skarydzew, Morawin, Plugawice, Oświęcim, Tonia, Wrzosy, Torzeniec; 7. w powiecie ostrzeszowskim, w gminie Grabów nad Prosną, miejscowości: Bobrowniki, Marczykowskie, Kuźnica Bobrowska, Bułowe, Marszałki.
W województwie łódzkim, w powiecie wieruszowskim:
—
w gminie Wieruszów: miejscowości w ich granicach administracyjnych Wyszanów, Mieczków Lubczyna, Kowalówka, Cieszęcin, Polesie, Teklinów, Mirków, Miasto Wieruszów, Kuźnica Skakawska, Dobrydział,
—
w gminie Galewice: Osiek, Kolonia Osiek.
2.3.2025
W województwie wielkopolskim: 1. w powiecie kępińskim, w gminie Kępno, miejscowości: Mikorzyn, Mechnice, Domanin, Myjomice, Kierzenko, Ostrówiec, Kierzno, Pustkowie Kierzeńskie; 2. w powiecie ostrzeszowskim, w gminie Doruchów, miejscowość: Rudniczysko.
W województwie łódzkim, w powiecie wieruszowskim, w gminie Wieruszów miejscowość Jutrków.
22.2.2025-2.3.2025
PL-HPAI(P)-2025-00013
PL-HPAI(P)-2025-00017
PL-HPAI(P)-2025-00018
W województwie wielkopolskim: 1. w powiecie kaliskim, w gminie Blizanów, miejscowość: Czajków, Zagorzyn, Żegocin, Piotrów, Pawłówek, Pruszków, Warszówka, Poklęków, Pamięcin; 2. w powiecie kaliskim, w gminie Koźminek, miejscowości: Bogdanów, Józefina (wraz z Murowaniec), Krzyżówki (wraz z Sokołówka), Młynisko, Nowy Nakwasin, Osuchów, Rogal, Smółki, Oszczeklin, Dąbrowa; 3. w powiecie kaliskim, w gminie Ceków-Kolonia, miejscowości: Kosmów-Kolonia, Morawin, Plewnia, Podzborów, Przedzeń, Szadek, Kuźnica, Nowa Plewnia, Ceków-Kolonia, Stare Prażuchy; 4. w powiecie kaliskim, w gminie Godziesze Wielkie, miejscowość: Wolica; 5. w powiecie kaliskim, w gminie Opatówek, w miejscowości: Opatówek, Chełmce, Cienia Druga (wraz z Bogumiłów), Cienia-Folwark, Cienia Pierwsza, Cienia Trzecia, Janików, Józefów, Michałów Drugi (wraz z Michałów Pierwszy), Nędzerzew, Porwity, Rajsko, Sierzchów, Szałe, Szulec, Tłokinia Nowa, Trojanów, Warszew, Modła, Zawady, Zduny, Michałów Czwarty; 6. w powiecie kaliskim, w gminie Szczytniki, miejscowości: Krowica Zawodnia (wraz z Grab), Marchwacz-Kolonia, Trzęsów, Marchwacz, Krowica Pusta, Radliczyce, Cieszyków, Murowaniec, Marcjanów, Szczytniki, Staw, Chojno Lipka, Kościany, Tymieniec, Gorzuchy, Mroczki Wielkie; 7. w powiecie kaliskim, w gminie Lisków, miejscowości: Budy Liskowskie, Swoboda, Józefów, Dębniałki, Małgów-Kolonia, Małgów, Strzałków, Chrusty, Nadzież, Madalin, Pyczek, Tomaszew, Lisków, Lisków-Rzgów, Żychów, Wygoda, Annopol, Zakrzyn-Kolonia, Zakrzyn, Koźlątków; 8. w powiecie kaliskim, w gminie Mycielin, miejscowość: Kuszyn (wraz z Jaszczury); 9. w powiecie kaliskim, w gminie Żelazków, miejscowości: Anielin, Biernatki, Borków Nowy, Borków Stary, Czartki, Garzew, Goliszew, Góry Zborowskie, Góry Złotnickie, Helenów, Janków, Kokanin, Kolonia Kokanin, Kolonia Skarszewek (wraz z Chrusty), Koronka, Michałów, Niedźwiady, Russów, Russówek, Strugi, Szosa Turecka, Tykadłów, Witoldów, Wojciechówka, Zborów, Złotniki Małe, Złotniki Wielkie, Żelazków; 10. w mieście Kalisz, osiedla: Adama Asnyka, Chmielnik, Czaszki, Dobro, Dobrzec P, Dobrzec W, Kaliniec, Korczak, Majków, Ogrody, Piskorzewie, Piwonice, Rajsków, Rogatka, Rypinek, Serbinów, Śródmieście, Tyniec, Widok, Winiary, Zagorzynek; 11. w powiecie tureckim, w gminie Kawęczyn, miejscowości: Chocim, Żdżary, Będziechów.
W województwie łódzkim w powiecie sieradzkim:
—
w gminie Goszczanów, miejscowości: Lipicze, Lipicze Górne, Lipicze Olendry
Zawierające się w promieniu 10 km od współrzędnych GPS
51.785304/ 18.407166, 18
51.786618815/ 18.40688426
10.3.2025
W województwie wielkopolskim w powiecie kaliskim: 1. powiecie kaliskim, w gminie Opatówek, miejscowości: Dębe-Kolonia, Kobierno, Rożdżały, Tłokinia Kościelna, Tłokinia Mała, Tłokinia Wielka, Słoneczna, Frankowizna, Borów, Zmyślanka; 2. w powiecie kaliskim, w gminie Ceków-Kolonia, miejscowości: Beznatka, Kamień, Bystrek, Cierpiatka, Kamień-Kolonia, Korek, Magdalenów; 3. w powiecie kaliskim, w gminie Koźminek, miejscowości: Dębsko, Emilianów (wraz z Zosina), Tymianek, Pietrzyków, Smółki, Ksawerów, Marianów, Złotniki, Nowy Karolew, Gać Kaliska, Stary Karolew, Chodybki, Moskurnia, miasto Koźminek (wraz z Przydziałki, Słowiki, Warwarówka), Stary Nakwasin; 4. w powiecie kaliskim, w gminie Żelazków miejscowość: Dębe, Florentyna, Ilno, Pólko, Skarszew, Skarszewek; 5. w powiecie kaliskim, w gminie Lisków, miejscowość: Trzebienie, Ciepielew.
W województwie łódzkim w powiecie sieradzkim:
—
w gminie Goszczanów, miejscowości: Sokołów, Sulmów, Wola Tłomakowa
Zawierające się w promieniu 3 km od współrzędnych GPS
51.785304/ 18.407166, 18
51.786618815/ 18.40688426
2.3.2025-10.3.2025
PL-HPAI(P)-2025-00014
W województwie lubuskim, 1)
w powiecie nowosolskim,
—
w gminie Nowa Sól, miejscowości: Buczków, Lubięcin, Jeziorna, Jodłów, Dąbrowno, Chełmek, Stany Lipiny;
—
w gminie Kolsko, miejscowości: Uście, Tatarki, Jesiona, Sławocin, Tyrszeliny, Kolsko, Mesze;
—
w gminie Otyń, miejscowość Bobrowniki; 2)
w powiecie zielonogórskim,
—
w gminie Zabór, miejscowości: Tarnawa, Milsko, Dąbrowa, Zabór;
—
w gminie Bojadła, miejscowości: Bojadła, Przewóz, Klenica, Siadcza, Bełcze, Pólko Sosnówka;
—
w gminie Kargowa, miejscowość Karszyn; 3)
w powiecie wschowskim
—
w gminie Sława, miejscowości: Ciosaniec, Droniki, Gola, Szreniawa, Lubiatów, Lubogoszcz, Kuźnica Głogowska, Tarnów Jezierny, część miejscowości Sława (część miejscowości położona na południowy zachód od drogi DW 278).
W województwie wielkopolskim w powiecie wolsztyńskim: 1. w gminie Wolsztyn, miejscowości: Wilcze, Rudno, część miejscowości Świętno na południe od Południowego Kanału Obry.
7.3.2025
W województwie lubuskim, 1)
w powiecie nowosolskim, w gminie Kolsko, miejscowości: Konotop, Lipka 2)
w powiecie zielonogórskim, w gminie Bojadła, miejscowości: Pyrnik Młynkowo, Kartno, Susłów
27.2.2025-7.3.2025
PL-HPAI(P)-2025-00016
W województwie wielkopolskim w powiecie kaliskim: 1. w gminie Lisków: Budy Liskowskie, Ciepielów, Lisków, Swoboda, Trzebienie; 2. w gminie Koźminek: Chodybki, Dębsko, Gać Kaliska, Koźminek, Ksawerów, Marianów, Moskurnia, Nowy Karolew, Oszczeklin, Pietrzyków.
W województwie łódzkim w powiecie sieradzkim: 1. w gminie Błaszki, miejscowości: obszar wiejski: Adamki, Borysławice, Chabierów, Domaniew, Garbów, Golków, Gorzałów, Kalinowa, Kamienna, Kamienna Kolonia, Kołdów, Kwasków, Lubanów, Maciszewice, Orzeżyn, Skalmierz, Smaszków, Suliszewice, Wójcice oraz miasto Błaszki – obręb 1; 2. w gminie Goszczanów, miejscowości: Czerniaków, Gawłowice, Goszczanów, Janówek, Karolina, Kaszew, Lipicze, Poniatów, Poniatówek, Poprężniki, Poradzew, Rzężawy, Sokołów, Strachanów, Sulmów, Wacławów, Wola Tłomakowa, Wroniawy; 3. w gminie Warta, miejscowości: Augustynów, Cielce, Czartki, Duszniki, Gać Warcka, Grzybki, Góra, Głaniszew, Kawęczynek, Małków, Mikołajewice, Raczków, Socha, Socha Kolonia, Tomisławice, Ustków, Witów, Wola Zadąbrowska Stara Wieś, Wola Zadąbrowska Nowa Wieś, Zadąbrów Rudunek, Zadąbrów Wiatraki, Zagajew oraz miasto Warta – obręb 1, obręb 16, obręb 2, obręb 3, obręb 4, obręb 5, obręb 6, obręb 7, obręb 8. Zawierające się w promieniu 10 km od współrzędnych GPS: 51.74103/18.46314
10.3.2025
W województwie wielkopolskim w powiecie kaliskim:
—
w gminie Szczytniki: Mroczki Wielkie.
W województwie łódzkim w powiecie sieradzkim:
—
w gminie Goszczanów, miejscowości: Chlewo, Chwalęcice, Stojanów, Sulmówek, Świnice Kaliskie, Waliszewice, Wilkszyce;
—
w gminie Błaszki, miejscowości: Kobylniki, Korzenica, Morawki, Nacesławice, Sędzimirowice
—
w gminie Warta, miejscowości: Krąków, Zielęcin.
Zawierające się w promieniu 3 km od współrzędnych GPS: 51.74103/18.46314
2.3.2025-10.3.2025

Member State: Portugal

ADIS reference number of the outbreak
Area comprising:
Date until applicable in accordance with Article 55 of Delegated Regulation (EU) 2020/687
PT-HPAI(P)-2025-00001
The parts of from the county of Sintra and the parts of the county of Mafra from the district of Lisboa, that are beyond the areas described in the protection zone, and are contained within circle of 10 kilometers radius, centered on GPS coordinates 38.898732N, -9.400721W
10.2.2025
The parts from the county of Sintra, from the district of Lisboa, that are contained within circle of 3 kilometers radius, centered on GPS coordinates 38.898732N, -9.400721W
2.2.2025-10.2.2025
PT-HPAI(P)-2025-00002
The parts of from the county of Sintra and the parts of the county of Mafra from the district of Lisboa, that are beyond the areas described in the protection zone, and are contained within circle of 10 kilometers radius, centered on GPS coordinates 38.905151N, -9.407569W
17.2.2025
The parts from the county of Sintra, from the district of Lisboa, that are contained within circle of 3 kilometers radius, centered on GPS coordinates 38.905151N, -9.407569W
9.2.2025-17.2.2025
PT-HPAI(NON-P)-2025-00001
The parts of from the county of Caldas da Rainha that are beyond the areas described in the protection zone, and the parts of the county of Alcobaça and Óbidos, from the district of Leiria, that are contained within the circle of 10 kilometers radius, centered on GPS coordinates 39.434184N, -9.142658W
23.2.2025
The parts from the county of Caldas da Rainha, from the district of Leiria, that are contained within circle of 3 kilometers radius, centered on GPS coordinates 39.434184N, -9.142658W
15.2.2025-23.2.2025
PT-HPAI(NON-P)-2025-00003
The parts of from the counties of Albergaria-a-Velha, Aveiro and Estarreja that are beyond the areas described in the protection zone, and the parts of the counties Albergaria-a-Velha, Aveiro, Estarreja, Águeda and Murtosa, from the district of Aveiro, that are contained within the circle of 10 kilometers radius, centered on GPS coordinates 40.675658N, -8.559449W
3.3.2025
The parts from the counties of Albergaria-a-Velha, Aveiro and Estarreja, from the district of Aveiro, that are contained within circle of 3 kilometers radius, centered on GPS coordinates 40.675658N, -8.559449W
23.2.2025 -3.3.2025

Part C

Further restricted zones in the concerned Member States* as referred to in Article 1, point (b), and Article 4:

Member State: Italy

Area comprising:
Date until measures are to remain applicable in accordance with Article 4
Lombardia region:
—
Municipality of Acquanegra sul Chiese (Mantova)
—
Municipality of Asola (Mantova)
—
Municipality of Bagnolo San Vito (Mantova)
—
Municipality of Borgo Virgilio (Mantova)
—
Municipality of Canneto sull’Oglio (Mantova)
—
Municipality of Casalmoro (Mantova)
—
Municipality of Casaloldo (Mantova)
—
Municipality of Casalromano (Mantova)
—
Municipality of Castel d’Ario (Mantova)
—
Municipality of Castel Goffredo (Mantova)
—
Municipality of Castelbelforte (Mantova)
—
Municipality of Castiglione delle Stiviere (Mantova)
—
Municipality of Cavriana (Mantova)
—
Municipality of Ceresara (Mantova)
—
Municipality of Gazoldo degli Ippoliti (Mantova)
—
Municipality of Goito (Mantova)
—
Municipality of Guidizzolo (Mantova)
—
Municipality of Mantova (Mantova)
—
Municipality of Mariana Mantovana (Mantova)
—
Municipality of Marmirolo (Mantova)
—
Municipality of Medole (Mantova)
—
Municipality of Monzambano (Mantova)
—
Municipality of Piubega (Mantova)
—
Municipality of Ponti sul Mincio (Mantova)
—
Municipality of Porto Mantovano (Mantova)
—
Municipality of Redondesco (Mantova)
—
Municipality of Rodigo (Mantova)
—
Municipality of Roncoferraro (Mantova)
—
Municipality of Roverbella (Mantova)
—
Municipality of San Giorgio Bigarello (Mantova)
—
Municipality of Solferino (Mantova)
—
Municipality of Villimpenta (Mantova)
—
Municipality of Volta Mantovana (Mantova)
28.2.2025
Veneto region:
—
Municipality of Buttapietra (Verona)
—
Municipality of Castel d’Azzano (Verona)
—
Municipality of Castelnuovo del Garda (Verona) South of A4
—
Municipality of Erbè (Verona)
—
Municipality of Isola della Scala (Verona)
—
Municipality of Mozzecane (Verona)
—
Municipality of Nogara (Verona) North of SR10
—
Municipality of Nogarole Rocca (Verona)
—
Municipality of Peschiera del Garda (Verona) South of A4
—
Municipality of Povegliano Veronese (Verona)
—
Municipality of Sommacampagna (Verona) South of A4
—
Municipality of Sona (Verona) South of A4
—
Municipality of Sorgà (Verona) North of SR10
—
Municipality of Trevenzuolo (Verona)
—
Municipality of Valeggio sul Mincio (Verona)
—
Municipality of Verona (Verona) South of A4/West of San Giovanni Lupatoto
—
Municipality of Vigasio (Verona)
—
Municipality of Villafranca di Verona (Verona)
28.2.2025

*
In accordance with the Agreement on the withdrawal of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland from the European Union and the European Atomic Energy Community, and in particular Article 5(4) of the Windsor Framework (see Joint Declaration No 1/2023 of the Union and the United Kingdom in the Joint Committee established by the Agreement on the withdrawal of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland from the European Union and the European Atomic Energy Community of 24 March 2023, OJ L 102, 17.4.2023, p.87) in conjunction with Annex 2 to that Framework, for the purposes of this Annex, references to Member State include the United Kingdom in respect of Northern Ireland.

Political and Security Committee Decision (CFSP) 2025/319 of 11 February 2025 extending the mandate of the Head of Mission of the European Union Mission in Armenia (EUMA) (EUMA/1/2025)

Official Journalof the European Union ENL series
2025/319 12.2.2025
(1) Pursuant to Article 8(1) of Decision (CFSP) 2023/162, the Political and Security Committee (PSC) is authorised, in accordance with Article 38, third paragraph, of the Treaty, to take the relevant decisions for the purpose of exercising political control and strategic direction of the European Union Mission in Armenia (EUMA), including the decision to appoint a Head of Mission, upon a proposal of the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy (the ‘High Representative’).
(2) On 13 February 2024, the PSC adopted Decision (CFSP) 2024/604(2)extending the mandate of Mr Markus RITTER as Head of Mission of EUMA from 21 February 2024 to 19 February 2025.
(3) On 5 February 2025, the High Representative proposed to extend the mandate of Mr. Markus RITTER as Head of Mission of EUMA from 20 February 2025 to 19 February 2026,
THE POLITICAL AND SECURITY COMMITTEE,
Having regard to the Treaty on European Union, and in particular Article 38, third paragraph, thereof,
Having regard to Council Decision (CFSP) 2023/162 of 23 January 2023 on a European Union Mission in Armenia (EUMA) (1), and in particular Article 8 thereof,
Whereas:
(1) Pursuant to Article 8(1) of Decision (CFSP) 2023/162, the Political and Security Committee (PSC) is authorised, in accordance with Article 38, third paragraph, of the Treaty, to take the relevant decisions for the purpose of exercising political control and strategic direction of the European Union Mission in Armenia (EUMA), including the decision to appoint a Head of Mission, upon a proposal of the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy (the ‘High Representative’).
(2) On 13 February 2024, the PSC adopted Decision (CFSP) 2024/604 (2) extending the mandate of Mr Markus RITTER as Head of Mission of EUMA from 21 February 2024 to 19 February 2025.
(3) On 5 February 2025, the High Representative proposed to extend the mandate of Mr. Markus RITTER as Head of Mission of EUMA from 20 February 2025 to 19 February 2026,
HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
The mandate of Mr. Markus RITTER as Head of the European Union Mission in Armenia (EUMA) is extended from 20 February 2025 to 19 February 2026.
This Decision shall enter into force on the date of its adoption.

Commission Delegated Decision (EU) 2025/318 of 27 November 2024 on the unilateral inclusion of sectors by Sweden in the emissions trading system within the Union for buildings, road transport and additional sectors pursuant to Article 30j of Directive 2003/87/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council

Official Journalof the European Union ENL series
2025/318 14.2.2025
(1) Article 30j(1) of Directive 2003/87/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council provides Member States with the possibility, from 2027, to unilaterally extend the application of the emissions trading system within the Union (‘EU ETS’) for buildings, road transport and additional sectors, to sectors that are not listed in Annex III to Directive 2003/87/EC.
(2) When availing themselves of this possibility, Member States are to take into account in particular the effects on the internal market, potential distortions of competition, the environmental integrity of the emissions trading system and the reliability of the planned monitoring and reporting system.
(3) On 19 July 2024, Sweden notified a request to expand the application of the emission trading system for buildings, road transport and additional sectors to a list of sectors not yet covered by Annex III to, or by Chapters II and III of, Directive 2003/87/EC.
(4) The Swedish authorities explained that the inclusion of additional sectors leads to a more uniform pricing of carbon dioxide, and a more cost-effective climate transition, thereby further strengthening the environmental integrity of ETS 2. In addition, this unilateral extension would reduce the administrative burden and ease the reporting and monitoring processes for the regulated entities and the national competent authority.
(5) In the Commission’s opinion, expanding the scope of the EU ETS beyond the list of activities listed under Annex III to Directive 2003/87/EC, as Sweden has requested, would indeed have environmental benefits, and would bring about an administrative simplification for fuel suppliers acting as regulated entities in Sweden.
(6) On the basis of the reviewed greenhouse gas emissions data for the years 2016, 2017 and 2018 carried out in 2020, in accordance with Article 4(3) of Regulation (EU) 2018/842 of the European Parliament and of the Council(2), the average total amount of emissions corresponding to the sectors notified by Sweden in the context of this request for unilateral extension amounts to 1 680 358 tCO2. This amount will be used as a basis for calculating the future amount of additional allowances to be issued as of 2027.
(7) The Commission has assessed the reporting and monitoring methodologies planned by Sweden and has concluded that these are reliable and in line with the requirements of Article 30j of Directive 2003/87/EC.
(8) The excise duty system in place in Sweden, particularly the distribution infrastructures, does not effectively allow regulated entities to differentiate the end use of fuels between, on the one hand, sectors already covered by Annex III to Directive 2003/87/EC and, on the other hand, the sectors concerned by this extension of scope. To facilitate cost-effective monitoring, reporting and verification of emissions and reduce the administrative burden linked with reporting associated with the scope factor in the annual emissions reports and the monitoring plans, regulated entities should not be required to distinguish the reporting of emissions in sectors concerned by the extension of scope from emissions in sectors already covered by Annex III to Directive 2003/87/EC.
(9) In order to comply with the regular annual cycle for monitoring, reporting and verification of emissions in the new emissions trading system for buildings, road transport and additional sectors, it is appropriate for regulated entities to report verified emissions for the extended scope starting on 1 January 2025, in accordance with Article 30f(2) of Directive 2003/87/EC,
IPCC code Sector Content
1 A 3 c Railways Emissions from railway transport for both freight and passenger traffic routes
1 A 3 d (subset) Waterborne Navigation Emissions from fuels used in leisure boats, excluding commercial waterborne navigation
1 A 3 e ii Off-road transportation Combustion emissions from off-road machinery in airports and harbours, and off-road activities not otherwise reported
1 A 4 c Agriculture/Forestry/Fishing Emissions from fuel combustion in agriculture, forestry, or domestic inland, coastal and deep-sea fishing. This includes traction vehicles, pump fuel use, grain drying, horticultural greenhouses and other agriculture, forestry or fishing related fuel use (Activities included in ISIC categories 05, 11, 12, 1302), excluding highway agricultural transportation
THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,
Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,
Having regard to Directive 2003/87/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 October 2003 establishing a system for greenhouse gas emission allowance trading within the Union and amending Council Directive 96/61/EC (1), and in particular Article 30j thereof,
Whereas:
(1) Article 30j(1) of Directive 2003/87/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council provides Member States with the possibility, from 2027, to unilaterally extend the application of the emissions trading system within the Union (‘EU ETS’) for buildings, road transport and additional sectors, to sectors that are not listed in Annex III to Directive 2003/87/EC.
(2) When availing themselves of this possibility, Member States are to take into account in particular the effects on the internal market, potential distortions of competition, the environmental integrity of the emissions trading system and the reliability of the planned monitoring and reporting system.
(3) On 19 July 2024, Sweden notified a request to expand the application of the emission trading system for buildings, road transport and additional sectors to a list of sectors not yet covered by Annex III to, or by Chapters II and III of, Directive 2003/87/EC.
(4) The Swedish authorities explained that the inclusion of additional sectors leads to a more uniform pricing of carbon dioxide, and a more cost-effective climate transition, thereby further strengthening the environmental integrity of ETS 2. In addition, this unilateral extension would reduce the administrative burden and ease the reporting and monitoring processes for the regulated entities and the national competent authority.
(5) In the Commission’s opinion, expanding the scope of the EU ETS beyond the list of activities listed under Annex III to Directive 2003/87/EC, as Sweden has requested, would indeed have environmental benefits, and would bring about an administrative simplification for fuel suppliers acting as regulated entities in Sweden.
(6) On the basis of the reviewed greenhouse gas emissions data for the years 2016, 2017 and 2018 carried out in 2020, in accordance with Article 4(3) of Regulation (EU) 2018/842 of the European Parliament and of the Council (2), the average total amount of emissions corresponding to the sectors notified by Sweden in the context of this request for unilateral extension amounts to 1 680 358 tCO2. This amount will be used as a basis for calculating the future amount of additional allowances to be issued as of 2027.
(7) The Commission has assessed the reporting and monitoring methodologies planned by Sweden and has concluded that these are reliable and in line with the requirements of Article 30j of Directive 2003/87/EC.
(8) The excise duty system in place in Sweden, particularly the distribution infrastructures, does not effectively allow regulated entities to differentiate the end use of fuels between, on the one hand, sectors already covered by Annex III to Directive 2003/87/EC and, on the other hand, the sectors concerned by this extension of scope. To facilitate cost-effective monitoring, reporting and verification of emissions and reduce the administrative burden linked with reporting associated with the scope factor in the annual emissions reports and the monitoring plans, regulated entities should not be required to distinguish the reporting of emissions in sectors concerned by the extension of scope from emissions in sectors already covered by Annex III to Directive 2003/87/EC.
(9) In order to comply with the regular annual cycle for monitoring, reporting and verification of emissions in the new emissions trading system for buildings, road transport and additional sectors, it is appropriate for regulated entities to report verified emissions for the extended scope starting on 1 January 2025, in accordance with Article 30f(2) of Directive 2003/87/EC,
HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:

Scope of the unilateral extension approval

The extension, in Sweden, of the activity referred to in Annex III to Directive 2003/87/EC to the sectors listed in the Annex to this Decision is approved subject to the conditions listed in Article 3.

Authorisation of the issue of additional allowances

Additional allowances shall be issued in 2027 on the basis of the average amount of total emissions of 1 680 358 tCO2 reported by Sweden for the sectors listed in the Annex to this decision for the years 2016, 2017 and 2018 in accordance with the rules set in Article 30c(1) of Directive 2003/87/EC.

Monitoring and reporting obligations

Sweden shall ensure that each regulated entity monitors and reports, in accordance with Article 30f(2) of Directive 2003/87/EC, to the competent authority, for each calendar year, the emissions corresponding to the quantities of fuels released for consumption in the sectors listed in the Annex to this Decision that have taken place from 1 January 2025.

Entry into force and application

This Decision shall enter into force on the third day following that of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.

IPCC code
Sector
Content
1 A 3 c
Railways
Emissions from railway transport for both freight and passenger traffic routes
1 A 3 d (subset)
Waterborne Navigation
Emissions from fuels used in leisure boats, excluding commercial waterborne navigation
1 A 3 e ii
Off-road transportation
Combustion emissions from off-road machinery in airports and harbours, and off-road activities not otherwise reported
1 A 4 c
Agriculture/Forestry/Fishing
Emissions from fuel combustion in agriculture, forestry, or domestic inland, coastal and deep-sea fishing. This includes traction vehicles, pump fuel use, grain drying, horticultural greenhouses and other agriculture, forestry or fishing related fuel use (Activities included in ISIC categories 05, 11, 12, 1302), excluding highway agricultural transportation

Commission Decision (EU) 2025/317 of 20 June 2024 on the measures State Aid SA.44944 (2019/C ex 2016/FC) and SA.53552 (2019/C ex 2019/FC) – Tax treatment of public casinos operators – and alleged guarantee for public casinos operators (Wirtschaftlichkeitsgarantie) – Germany (notified under document C(2024) 4183)

Official Journalof the European Union ENL series
2025/317 25.2.2025
(1) On 22 March 2016 and 4 February 2019, the Commission received four complaints filed by a trade association of gambling machines operators (Fachverband Spielhallen e.V.) and an operator of gambling machines (‘the complainants’). The complainants claimed that operators of the public casinos (Spielbankunternehmer, ‘public casinos operators’) in Germany receive State aid through various measures which allegedly distort the market for gambling services:—Measure 1:the reduction of the amount of the casino tax paid by public casinos operators by the amount of the value added tax (‘VAT’) (‘VAT offsetting mechanism’) introduced by all 16 GermanLänderafter 2006;—Measure 2:the provisions of laws on public casinos of sevenLänderreducing (‘measure 2.a’) or allowing the authorities of theLänderto reduce the casino tax rate in the first years of operation of a public casino, as well as the actual implementation (if any) of this possibility (‘measure 2.b’);—Measure 3:the deduction from the tax base of the trade tax and the corporate or income tax of the ‘profit skimming’ (Gewinnabschöpfung) paid by the public casinos operators in North Rhine-Westphalia (‘NRW’) with respect to their non-gambling activities;—Measure 4:the alleged guarantee to public casino operators in all 16Länderto make a reasonable commercial profit (‘measure 4.a’) and the explicit provisions of laws on public casinos in nineLänderreducing (‘measure 4.b’) or allowing the authorities of theLänderto reduce the casino tax in specific cases, as well as the actual implementation (if any) of this possibility (‘measure 4.c’);—Measure 5:the overall special tax system generally applicable to public casinos operators with regard to their gambling related activities, which would induce a lower tax burden compared to the rules applicable to operators of commercial gambling halls. — Measure 1:the reduction of the amount of the casino tax paid by public casinos operators by the amount of the value added tax (‘VAT’) (‘VAT offsetting mechanism’) introduced by all 16 GermanLänderafter 2006; — Measure 2:the provisions of laws on public casinos of sevenLänderreducing (‘measure 2.a’) or allowing the authorities of theLänderto reduce the casino tax rate in the first years of operation of a public casino, as well as the actual implementation (if any) of this possibility (‘measure 2.b’); — Measure 3:the deduction from the tax base of the trade tax and the corporate or income tax of the ‘profit skimming’ (Gewinnabschöpfung) paid by the public casinos operators in North Rhine-Westphalia (‘NRW’) with respect to their non-gambling activities; — Measure 4:the alleged guarantee to public casino operators in all 16Länderto make a reasonable commercial profit (‘measure 4.a’) and the explicit provisions of laws on public casinos in nineLänderreducing (‘measure 4.b’) or allowing the authorities of theLänderto reduce the casino tax in specific cases, as well as the actual implementation (if any) of this possibility (‘measure 4.c’); — Measure 5:the overall special tax system generally applicable to public casinos operators with regard to their gambling related activities, which would induce a lower tax burden compared to the rules applicable to operators of commercial gambling halls.
— Measure 1:the reduction of the amount of the casino tax paid by public casinos operators by the amount of the value added tax (‘VAT’) (‘VAT offsetting mechanism’) introduced by all 16 GermanLänderafter 2006;
— Measure 2:the provisions of laws on public casinos of sevenLänderreducing (‘measure 2.a’) or allowing the authorities of theLänderto reduce the casino tax rate in the first years of operation of a public casino, as well as the actual implementation (if any) of this possibility (‘measure 2.b’);
— Measure 3:the deduction from the tax base of the trade tax and the corporate or income tax of the ‘profit skimming’ (Gewinnabschöpfung) paid by the public casinos operators in North Rhine-Westphalia (‘NRW’) with respect to their non-gambling activities;
— Measure 4:the alleged guarantee to public casino operators in all 16Länderto make a reasonable commercial profit (‘measure 4.a’) and the explicit provisions of laws on public casinos in nineLänderreducing (‘measure 4.b’) or allowing the authorities of theLänderto reduce the casino tax in specific cases, as well as the actual implementation (if any) of this possibility (‘measure 4.c’);
— Measure 5:the overall special tax system generally applicable to public casinos operators with regard to their gambling related activities, which would induce a lower tax burden compared to the rules applicable to operators of commercial gambling halls.
— Measure 1:the reduction of the amount of the casino tax paid by public casinos operators by the amount of the value added tax (‘VAT’) (‘VAT offsetting mechanism’) introduced by all 16 GermanLänderafter 2006;
— Measure 2:the provisions of laws on public casinos of sevenLänderreducing (‘measure 2.a’) or allowing the authorities of theLänderto reduce the casino tax rate in the first years of operation of a public casino, as well as the actual implementation (if any) of this possibility (‘measure 2.b’);
— Measure 3:the deduction from the tax base of the trade tax and the corporate or income tax of the ‘profit skimming’ (Gewinnabschöpfung) paid by the public casinos operators in North Rhine-Westphalia (‘NRW’) with respect to their non-gambling activities;
— Measure 4:the alleged guarantee to public casino operators in all 16Länderto make a reasonable commercial profit (‘measure 4.a’) and the explicit provisions of laws on public casinos in nineLänderreducing (‘measure 4.b’) or allowing the authorities of theLänderto reduce the casino tax in specific cases, as well as the actual implementation (if any) of this possibility (‘measure 4.c’);
— Measure 5:the overall special tax system generally applicable to public casinos operators with regard to their gambling related activities, which would induce a lower tax burden compared to the rules applicable to operators of commercial gambling halls.
(2) By letter dated 9 December 2019 (‘the opening decision’), the Commission considered that measure 3 and measure 4.a did not constitute State aid(1), but informed Germany that it had decided to initiate the procedure laid down in Article 108(2) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) in respect of the following measures:—the special tax rules generally applicable to public casinos operators in each of the 16 GermanLänder(‘measure 5’), composed of several tax exemptions and special taxes, including all the general and automatic features of these special taxes (including in particular measure 1, measure 2.a and measure 4.b);—the ad hoc decisions of the public authorities to reduce the special taxes applicable to the public casinos operators in case of openings of new public casinos (‘measure 2.b’) and under other circumstances (‘measure 4.c’). — the special tax rules generally applicable to public casinos operators in each of the 16 GermanLänder(‘measure 5’), composed of several tax exemptions and special taxes, including all the general and automatic features of these special taxes (including in particular measure 1, measure 2.a and measure 4.b); — the ad hoc decisions of the public authorities to reduce the special taxes applicable to the public casinos operators in case of openings of new public casinos (‘measure 2.b’) and under other circumstances (‘measure 4.c’).
— the special tax rules generally applicable to public casinos operators in each of the 16 GermanLänder(‘measure 5’), composed of several tax exemptions and special taxes, including all the general and automatic features of these special taxes (including in particular measure 1, measure 2.a and measure 4.b);
— the ad hoc decisions of the public authorities to reduce the special taxes applicable to the public casinos operators in case of openings of new public casinos (‘measure 2.b’) and under other circumstances (‘measure 4.c’).
— the special tax rules generally applicable to public casinos operators in each of the 16 GermanLänder(‘measure 5’), composed of several tax exemptions and special taxes, including all the general and automatic features of these special taxes (including in particular measure 1, measure 2.a and measure 4.b);
— the ad hoc decisions of the public authorities to reduce the special taxes applicable to the public casinos operators in case of openings of new public casinos (‘measure 2.b’) and under other circumstances (‘measure 4.c’).
(3) The opening decision was published in theOfficial Journal of the European Union(2). The Commission invited interested parties to submit their comments on the measures.
(4) On 28 February 2020, the German federal authorities and a number ofLändersubmitted comments.
(5) The Commission also received comments from public casinos operators and an association of such operators:—Spielbank Bad Homburg Wicker & Co. KG (25 March 2020),—European Casino Association (3 July 2020),—Spielbank Hamburg Jahr + Achterfeld GmbH & Co. KG, Spielbank Wiesbaden GmbH & Co. KG and Spielbanken Niedersachsen GmbH (3 July 2020),—François-Blanc-Spielbank GmbH (Bad Homburg v.d. Höhe) (4 July 2020),—Spielbank Bad Neuenahr GmbH & Co. KG (3 August 2020), — Spielbank Bad Homburg Wicker & Co. KG (25 March 2020), — European Casino Association (3 July 2020), — Spielbank Hamburg Jahr + Achterfeld GmbH & Co. KG, Spielbank Wiesbaden GmbH & Co. KG and Spielbanken Niedersachsen GmbH (3 July 2020), — François-Blanc-Spielbank GmbH (Bad Homburg v.d. Höhe) (4 July 2020), — Spielbank Bad Neuenahr GmbH & Co. KG (3 August 2020),
— Spielbank Bad Homburg Wicker & Co. KG (25 March 2020),
— European Casino Association (3 July 2020),
— Spielbank Hamburg Jahr + Achterfeld GmbH & Co. KG, Spielbank Wiesbaden GmbH & Co. KG and Spielbanken Niedersachsen GmbH (3 July 2020),
— François-Blanc-Spielbank GmbH (Bad Homburg v.d. Höhe) (4 July 2020),
— Spielbank Bad Neuenahr GmbH & Co. KG (3 August 2020),
— Spielbank Bad Homburg Wicker & Co. KG (25 March 2020),
— European Casino Association (3 July 2020),
— Spielbank Hamburg Jahr + Achterfeld GmbH & Co. KG, Spielbank Wiesbaden GmbH & Co. KG and Spielbanken Niedersachsen GmbH (3 July 2020),
— François-Blanc-Spielbank GmbH (Bad Homburg v.d. Höhe) (4 July 2020),
— Spielbank Bad Neuenahr GmbH & Co. KG (3 August 2020),
(6) On 5 August 2020, the complainants submitted comments.
(7) On 14 August 2020, the Commission forwarded the comments by interested parties (public casinos operators, association of such operators and the complainants) to Germany, which was given the opportunity to react. Germany provided comments by letter dated 17 September 2020.
(8) The Commission services requested additional information from the German authorities by letters of 11 March 2020, 19 June 2020 (complemented by letter of 25 June 2020), 19 September 2020, 23 September 2021, 14 January 2022, 13 July 2022, 14 December 2022, 22 November 2023 and 21 March 2024. Germany (the federal authorities and, as the case may be, theLänder) replied on 7 May 2020, 10 July 2020, 19 January 2021 (complemented by letters of 25 March 2021, 20 September 2021 and 15 January 2024), 22 October 2021 (complemented by letters of 19 November 2021 and 21 January 2022), 4 March 2022, 1 September 2022, 14 February 2023, 11 December 2023 and 4 April 2024.
(9) The complainants submitted further information on 25 November 2021, 29 August 2022 and 23 November 2022.
(10) For the purpose of this Decision, the German legal system can be regarded as distinguishing between two types of games of chance.
(11) On the one hand, certain gambling machines can be freely operated by specialised gambling halls (Spielhallenorgewerbliche Spielhallen, ‘gambling halls’ or ‘commercial gambling halls’) or by restaurants, provided that the rules of the Regulation on gaming devices and other games with the possibility of winning (Spielverordnung)(3)are complied with. According to the gambling halls regulations of theLänder(Spielhallengesetze) and to the German commercial ordinance (Gewerbeordnung), a licence is necessary to operate commercial gambling halls.
(12) On the other hand, casino games (blackjack, roulette, poker, etc., also called ‘table games’, in German alsogroßes SpielorTischspiel) and certain gambling machines are considered to be too risky and offering such games is in principle prohibited. By way of derogation from that rule, the GermanLänderare competent to allow certain entities (the public casinos operators) to offer such games, through concessions granted atLänderlevel, on the basis of the conditions laid down by the laws of theLänderon public casinos (Spielbankgesetze).
(13) There are differences between the games offered by public casinos and the games offered by commercial gambling halls. Casino games are in principle prohibited, are characterised by high personnel costs and can only be offered in public casinos. Gambling machines operated by public casinos and by commercial gambling halls are subject to different regulations: only the machines operated by commercial gambling halls are subject to a variety of restrictions and, in particular, have to comply with technical regulations preventing the possibility of unreasonably high losses in short periods of time. On the other hand, access to public casinos is restricted (entrance controls, limited number of public casinos perLand) while commercial gambling halls offer their services to a broader clientele.
(14) Public casinos operators are subject to the normal tax system as regards the income they generate from their non-gambling related activities (for example when they operate restaurants)(4).
(15) As regards their gambling income (income from casino games and gambling machines) and gambling-related income (e.g. entrance fees, tips, sale of gambling magazines, rental of ties and jackets), public casinos operators are subject to special taxes only applicable to them (see Section 2.2.1) and exempted from a number of otherwise applicable taxes (see Section 2.2.2), the exemptions being intrinsically linked to the special taxes (see Section 2.2.3).
(16) For their gambling income (in the broad sense, that is to say encompassing the gambling incomestricto sensuas well as the gambling-related income(5)), public casinos operators are subject to a special tax or special taxes laid down, in eachLand, in a law of theLand(Spielbankgesetz).
(17) Those special taxes mostly use as a tax base the gross gambling incomestricto sensu(‘GGI’, that is to say the bets placed by the players minus the winnings distributed to the players,Bruttospielertrag), which is the main source of gambling-related income for public casinos operators.
(18) The special taxes always include a so-called ‘casino tax’ (Spielbankabgabe) calculated on the basis of the GGI. In mostLänder, the tax rate is progressive depending on the GGI.
(19) In addition to the casino tax, several laws of theLänderlay down an additional tax on the GGI, under different names (weitere Leistung(en), Zusatzabgabe, zusätzliche Leistungen).
(20) In allLänder, the laws on public casinos lay down a reduction of the amount of casino tax by the amount of (net) VAT to be paid by the public casinos operators (VAT offsetting mechanism, measure 1).
(21) Some of the special taxes on the GGI are also sometimes automatically reduced by the laws of theLänderon public casinos after new public casinos are opened (measure 2.a) or in circumstances other than the opening of new public casinos (measure 4.b).
(22) In certainLänder, the special taxes on the GGI (or some of them) can be temporarily reduced, for the past or the future, by ad hoc decisions of the public authorities concerning one or several public casinos operators (measure 2.b for newly opened public casinos and measure 4.c in other circumstances).
(23) In addition to the special taxes on the GGI, several laws of theLänderlay down an additional tax on the tips received by staff of the public casinos (Troncabgabe).
(24) In addition to the taxes on the gambling turnover, several laws of theLänder(6)lay down an additional tax on the residual annual profit (JahresergebnisorGewinn, in essence calculated on the basis of turnover minus costs) of the public casinos operators, calculated using various methods and under various names (Gewinnabschöpfung, weitere Abgabe, Gewinnabgabe, Abführung des Überschusses).
(25) The laws of theLändersometimes provide that the money collected under the special taxes has to be used by theLänderto finance specific public expenses in the general interest.
(26) As from 1 January 2024(7), in theLandHamburg, the public casino operator is also liable to pay an equalization tax (Ausgleichsabgabe) in order to ensure that the operator pays at least the same amount of tax as it would pay if it were subject to the normal tax rules (as if there were no special taxes and no tax exemptions; this normal tax burden includes in particular corporate and/or income tax, trade tax and entertainment tax). The equalization tax is equal to the difference (if it is a positive amount) between the tax amount that would be due under the normal tax rules and the tax amount to be paid by the operator under the special tax rules. The operator must submit an annual declaration for the equalization tax to the tax office no later than six months after the end of the financial year(8)and the payment of the equalization tax should be made according to the general rules of the German tax ordinance. The German authorities have committed to calculate the entertainment tax on the basis of the provisions of the entertainment tax law of Hamburg applicable to gambling machines (Spielgeräte mit Geldgewinnmöglichkeit), which amounts to 5 % of the amount of the bets(9)placed in the public casino. Personal income tax and other income taxes (Ertragsteuern) are to be calculated using the highest applicable tax rate.
(27) In Germany, undertakings (including gambling halls) are normally subject to a series of general taxes, mainly income tax (Einkommensteuer)or corporate tax (Körperschaftsteuer)and the related solidarity surcharge (Solidaritätszuschlag), trade tax (Gewerbesteuer)and VAT(10).
(28) The main features of VAT, corporate tax and income tax (tax base and tax rate) are laid down at national level. Corporate tax and income tax are general taxes on profit and VAT is a general tax on turnover. Trade tax is another general tax on profit: the tax base (Messbetrag) is defined at national level, together with a minimum rate, but the municipalities are competent to set the rate (Hebesatz).
(29) Apart from those general taxes, undertakings offering gaming services(11)are also usually subject to a specific municipal tax, the entertainment tax (Vergnügungsteuer), except in Bavaria. TheLänderare competent to allow the municipalities to introduce the entertainment tax. The features (in particular the rates and the base) of such taxes are laid down at municipal level within the framework (maximum or minimum rate, tax base) set by theLandif it decided to do so. The tax is usually calculated as either a percentage of the amounts spent by the entertained person(12)(bets, entrance fee) or of the GGI generated by the entertaining entity or, as in earlier legislation, a lump-sum per entertaining device (gambling machine) or per surface dedicated to the entertainment activities. The entertainment tax laws of the municipalities usually apply to gambling machines or gambling devices (Spielgeräte, Spielautomaten, Spielapparate) and lay down a tax base (usually the GGI or the amount of the bets) and a tax rate (around 20 % if the tax base is the GGI, around 5 % if the tax base is the bets). The entertainment tax laws also sometimes apply to the playing for money (Ausspielen von Geld, Geldausspielungen) for which they also lay down a tax base and tax rate.
(30) The normal tax rules for different operators may thus vary depending on a series of conditions (for example, the trade tax and entertainment tax rate depends on the location of the operator, while corporate tax and personal income tax are alternatively applied depending on an entity’s legal form) and can evolve over time.
(31) Public casinos operators are exempted from a number of those otherwise applicable taxes.
(32) According to Article 6(1) of a 1938 law in Germany on public casinos (the ‘1938 law’)(13), which is still in force, public casinos operators are exempted from ‘national taxes levied on income, wealth, turnover and from the lottery tax and the capital duty’. Following a 1954 administrative agreement (Verwaltungsabkommendated 30 November 1954) interpreting that provision, Article 6(1) of the 1938 law is regarded as exempting public casinos operators from corporate tax (or, if applicable, income tax(14)) and related surcharges, such as the solidarity surcharge (Solidaritätszuschlag)introduced in 1991, and from VAT. The VAT exemption arising from the 1938 law was replaced by another provision in the VAT law of 1967 and was later abolished in April 2006 so that public casinos operators are since then subject to the normal VAT rules (see Section 3.1.4.3 of the opening decision for more details). Although Article 6(1) of the 1938 law would also constitute a basis for an exemption from the lottery tax (Lotteriesteuer), that provision is of no effect since public casinos operators do not organise games or events that would be subject to that tax(15). The capital duty (Gesellschaftsteuer) and the wealth tax (Vermögensteuer), explicitly mentioned in Article 6(1) of the 1938 law, have been abolished in 1992 and 1997 respectively(16)and thus, in practice, those exemptions have had no impact since then.
(33) Moreover, according to Article 6(2) of the 1938 law, ‘the extent to which public casinos operators are to be exempted from taxes of theLänderand of the municipalities is to be determined’ by the competent ministers (today, the ministers of theLänder). On the basis of that provision, the German authorities adopted further specific provisions specifying the scope of the exemption from taxes of theLänderand of the municipalities(17). According to the German authorities, those provisions have the effect of exempting public casinos operators from the trade tax and, where it exists, the entertainment tax(18). The trade tax exemption for public casinos operators is also, since 1995, laid down specifically in Article 3(1) of the trade tax law (Gewerbesteuergesetz)(19).
(34) As a consequence of those tax exemptions, municipalities in which a public casino is operated suffer a shortfall in tax revenue because, in principle, municipalities collect the trade tax and the entertainment tax from which public casinos operators are exempted. This shortfall in tax revenue is usually compensated by payments by theLänder(which collect the special taxes imposed on public casinos operators)(20).
(35) The objective of the special tax systems of theLänder(including the special taxes and the tax exemptions) is twofold.
(36) The casino tax and, more generally, all special taxes paid by the public casinos operators are considered to be a replacement for the other taxes from which the public casinos operators are exempted (Abgeltung). In addition, according to a 1933 law(21)in Germany (‘the 1933 law’), the profit of public casinos operators should not benefit private interests but should be ‘skimmed’ or ‘creamed off’ for purposes of public benefit (Abschöpfung).
(37) The special tax system applicable to public casinos operators in eachLandindeed first aims at replacing the taxes from which the public casinos operators are exempted (Abgeltung), that is to say that the normal taxes are deemed to be paid in the form of a special tax(22). From that perspective, public casinos operators are not really exempted from the normal taxes: the tax exemptions applicable to those operators merely mean that their special taxes are deemed to replace the normal taxes; the tax exemptions thus simply aim at preventing double taxation(23)and the amount paid under the special tax rules should in principle be the same as under the normal taxes.
(38) In addition, because the German legislator considered that the public casinos operators (regarded as monopolies(24)) would otherwise make a ‘very high profit’ under the normal tax rules, the special tax rules aim at skimming (creaming off) the profit of these operators which would not have been creamed off under normal tax rules (Abschöpfung)(25). As recalled by the German courts, the objective of the tax system applicable to public casinos operators was to ‘cream off’ their revenues. The underlying idea is to tax as much as possible the profits resulting from a socially unwanted but inevitable activity and from a business regarded as shielded from competition, an objective which the normal tax system could not achieve in the view of the German authorities at the time(26). There is however a limit within that second objective. The profit of the public casinos operators should be creamed off as far as possible but the special tax rules should not go beyond the economic viability limit (Wirtschaftlichkeitsgrenze) and should thus leave the operators an ‘appropriate’ profit. Public casinos however went bankrupt in the past(27), in particular because of the high tax burden under the special tax rules and the resulting low profitability.
(39) As consistently explained by the German authorities (quoting the case-law of the Federal Finance Court(28)) and by the complainants, both sets of measures described in Sections 2.2.1 and 2.2.2 (the special taxes and the tax exemptions) are intrinsically linked and make ‘sense’ only if considered as a whole. The general idea of a special tax and of the corresponding tax exemptions was set out in the same law (the 1938 law). As highlighted by the Federal Finance Court, the tax exemptionsaloneare not justified by any ‘economic or socio-political reason’, they merely are the ‘necessary consequence’ of the existence of the special taxes applicable to public casinos operators.
(40) In the opening decision, the Commission preliminarily considered that measure 5 and the ad hoc decisions of the public authorities to reduce the special taxes applicable to the public casinos operators in certain cases (measure 2.b and measure 4.c) could involve State aid.
(41) Regarding measure 5, the Commission in particular stressed that ‘a mere (abstract) comparison of the legal features of the two systems (namely on the one hand the normal rules generally applicable to all companies and on the other hand the special tax rules generally applicable to public casinos operators) is not straight forward because the tax system of the public casinos operators is, in allLänder, fundamentally different from the normal tax rules which it is deemed to replace’ (recital (85) of the opening decision).
(42) The Commission however also considered that, ‘because a specific group of operators is subject to a special tax regime, it is however also not possible to rule out the existence of an advantage, in the absence of a general provision (such as a claw-back or offsetting mechanism(29)) automatically preventing that an advantage arises from the different tax rules. The absence of a mechanism ensuring that the special tax regime applicable to public casinos operators is not more advantageous compared to the normal tax rules means that this regime involves potentially an advantage for these operators. Also, the fact that the rates of the special tax (casino tax and additional taxes) paid by the public casinos operators decreased in the period under review […] constitutes an indication that the schemes at stake could, following that change, provide advantages’ (recital (90) of the opening decision).
(43) The Commission thus concluded that it ‘needs to examine, in the context of the formal investigation, whether public casinos operators enjoyed an advantage because of their subjection to special tax rules as of 8 March 2007’ (recital (101) of the opening decision).
(44) Regarding measure 2.b and measure 4.c, the ad hoc reductions of the special taxes applicable to public casinos operators, the Commission noted that ‘whether these specific measures provided the public casinos operators concerned with a selective advantage cannot, for the reasons mentioned in recital (126) [of the opening decision], be assessed standalone’ and that ‘they need to be examined using the same method as for measure 5 (global comparison), but that comparison should take place in a second step’ (recitals (137) and (138) of the opening decision), before concluding that they could constitute State aid (recital (141) of the opening decision).
(45) As regards all measures referred to in the preceding recitals, the Commission also raised doubts as to the compatibility of such measures (if aid) with the internal market. These measures would indeed ‘qualify as operating aid, as they are not linked to any specific investment or project. Operating aid that merely diminishes the normal costs of an undertaking distorts competition and it is a priori doubtful that such aid could be regarded as compatible with the internal market’ (recital (146) of the opening decision).
(46) The German federal authorities submit that public casinos operators are not active in a market. Gambling is organised in such a way in Germany that offering table games is in principle forbidden. Only public casinos operators may offer such games, on the basis of a concession. Public casinos operators are entrusted with a public task, namely to offer gambling under State supervision in order to channel the gambling instinct of the population by means of a legal offer. The regional legal setup sometimes lays down that only theLandor public law entities can operate public casinos. The German Constitutional court considers that the operation of public casinos is not an economic activity (wirtschaftlicher Vorgang).
(47) The German federal authorities submit that there are no ‘normal market conditions’ for public casinos operators, which enjoy a monopoly, and hence there is no reference (Prüfungsmaßstab) on the basis of which one could identify an advantage. The reference cannot be the normal tax rules because this is a matter of selectivity which is a specific and autonomous criterion. Moreover, because public casinos operators are subject to a special tax system, their taxation cannot be compared to the normal tax rules and thus they cannot receive an advantage.
(48) The German federal authorities submit that, even if the reference is the normal tax rules, the Commission cannot rely on a lack of a claw-back mechanism in the special tax rules (and a mere possibility of an advantage) to conclude that the special tax rules are advantageous. They consider that the judgment of the Court of Justice of the European Union (‘the Court of Justice’) in case C-81/10 PFrance Télécom SA v European Commission(30)is not relevant in this case because France Telecom was subject to the normal tax rules (except for specific aspects).
(49) The German federal authorities also submit that the second objective of the special tax rules applicable to public casinos operators is not to tax the latter the same as (or more than) under the normal tax rules but merely to cream off their profit until the economic viability limit is reached (Wirtschaftlichkeitsgrenze). The second objective would allow a lower level of (special) taxation in cases where the profit is low (but it would not force the legislator to safeguard an existing public casino in order to safeguard the public task it carries out). The concept of replacement (Abgeltung) is not to be understood in quantitative terms but in qualitative terms. Thus, Germany submits that the Commission would rely on a wrong assumption when it argues in the opening decision that the reduction of the casino tax below the initially chosen level of 80 % would imply that the special system does not achieve its aim anymore.
(50) The German federal authorities explain that all measures covered by the formal investigation are consistent with the objective of the special tax system to cream off profits until the economic viability limit (Wirtschaftlichkeitsgrenze). The ad hoc reductions are meant to prevent a taxation going beyond the economic viability limit.
(51) Concerning the first step of the selectivity test (identification of the reference system), the German federal authorities argue that there is no single or uniform reference tax system to which public casinos operators and commercial gambling halls operators would be subject. Public casinos operators are an exception (Ausnahmeerscheinung); they have their own specific tax system and there is no reference framework (except for VAT which is harmonised at Union level) from which this specific tax system would derogate. According to the case-law of the Union courts, the normal tax rules can only be the reference system for persons to which those rules would in principle apply. Public casinos operators are legally and factually very different from operators of commercial gambling halls, mainly because the former carry out a public task while the latter carry out an economic activity (wirtschaftliche Tätigkeit).
(52) Concerning the second step of the selectivity test (derogation), the German federal authorities submit that the two different tax systems (normalvsspecific) have different objectives. The normal tax rules aim at generating revenue without obligation as to the use of the revenue. By contrast, the creamed off profits under the special tax rules are meant to benefit charitable purposes.
(53) Concerning the third step of the selectivity test (justification), the German federal authorities state that no justification for aprima facieselective measure can be provided in cases such as the one at stake where there is no common reference system. At the same time, there are similarities between the two tax systems, in particular the common principle of prevention of double taxation or excessive taxation. Thus, if there were only one common reference system (and the tax treatment of public casinos operators would beprima facieselective), the principle of prevention of excessive taxation should be taken into account.
(54) The German federal authorities consider that the special tax system applicable to the public casinos operators is the relevant reference system and there would therefore be no derogation. The German federal authorities, however, disagree that the objective of that special tax system is to reach at least the tax burden that would result from the normal tax rules, thus a possible advantage granted by the special tax rules would not run contrary to the logic of these special tax rules. In this context, should the Commission assess the coherence/consistency of the design of that separate reference framework in the light of the judgment of the Court of Justice in the caseCommission and Spain v Government of Gibraltar and United Kingdom(31), the German federal authorities consider that the special tax rules are consistent with their objective and are not selective by design.
(55) The German federal authorities consider that the ad hoc reductions are a part of the special tax rules and pursue the objective of prevention of excessive taxation which is one of the objectives of the special tax rules.
(56) The German federal authorities argue that there is no effect on trade because the effects of the measures are purely local and do not have more than marginal effects on cross-border investments or cross-border establishment. Because of the geographic location of most of the public casinos, it is also unlikely that clients from other Member States would travel to the German public casinos only to play there. The German federal authorities argue that public casinos located close to the border are a minority of cases and should therefore be disregarded. In addition, only the existence of a public casino as such (and not its level of taxation) is relevant to assess whether there is an effect on trade because taxation is not harmonised at Union level.
(57) The German federal authorities submit that the special tax rules cannot lead to an (even potential) distortion of competition because the operation of public casinos is a monopoly as referred to in paragraph 188 of the Commission Notice on the notion of State aid(32). Undertakings from other Member States cannot enter the German market because the freedom of establishment does not grant a right to obtain the concession required to operate a casino, not because of the special tax rules. In addition, there are significant differences between the games offered by public casinos and the games offered by commercial gambling halls. Casino games can only be offered by public casinos, are in principle prohibited and are characterised by high personnel costs (labour expenditure). Gambling machines operated by public casinos and by commercial gambling halls are subject to different regulations: only the machines operated by commercial gambling halls are subject to a variety of restrictions and, in particular, have to comply with technical regulations preventing the possibility of unreasonably high losses in short periods of time. On the other hand, access to public casinos is restricted (entrance controls, limited number of public casinos perLand) while commercial gambling halls offer their services to a broader clientele.
(58) As regards national taxes, the German federal authorities argue that the exemption from national taxes was already laid down in the 1938 law and should be regarded as an existing measure, irrespective of the regulatory actions (tax measures) adopted by theLänderafter 1958. The fact that the tax exemption was not used before 1958 in certainLänder(because no public casinos were opened in certainLänder) is irrelevant.
(59) For the German federal authorities, considering, as the Commission does, the exemption from national taxes not to be existing aid is contradictory to the case-law about regional selectivity, as detailed in paragraph 144 of the Commission Notice on the notion of State aid. Even if the special tax systems laid down at regional level could be regarded as derogations from the normal tax rules (which Germany contests), these derogations would be attributable to the GermanLänderwhich are autonomous.
(60) The German federal authorities also submit that the exemption from the solidarity surcharge is not a new measure because it was already covered by the 1938 law (as any other, even future, surcharge). Also, the surcharge is calculated on the basis of the amount of corporate or income tax due and as there is a corporate or income tax exemption, it is thus impossible to calculate the amount of the surcharge.
(61) As regardsLänder(and municipal) taxes, the German federal authorities consider that the exemptions fromLändertaxes are existing measures irrespective of their adoption date, because the legal basis for those exemptions was laid down in the 1938 law and the general principles of taxation of the public casinos (taxation until the limit of economic viability orWirtschaftlichkeitsgrenze) were also already laid down in the 1938 law. The legislator in 1938 could not list all the differentLändertaxes. Article 6(2) of the 1938 law also covers futureLändertaxes. The 1938 law does not impose exemptions fromLänderand municipal taxes; these were only laid down when required, that is when a public casino was created in theLand, which sometimes happened only after 1958; but the exemption always results from the 1938 law.
(62) As regards the ad hoc reductions of the special taxes (measures 2.b and 4.c), the German federal authorities consider that these measures are not selective because they result from the general principles of taxation of public casinos. Because those principles were laid down in the 1938 law and because the ad hoc measures directly stem from those principles, the ad hoc measures are, even if they were introduced after 1958, also not new measures.
(63) As regards the legal reductions of the special taxes and the temporary automatic legal reductions of the special taxes under certain circumstances (measures 2.a and 4.b), the German federal authorities consider that those measures do not provide a selective advantage. They are consistent with the general principles of taxation of public casinos.
(64) The German federal authorities submit that the measures at stake (the special tax schemes applicable to public casinos operators) pursue an objective of general interest (they refer to the reasoning made in other sections of their comments), are necessary, appropriate and proportionate.
(65) Apart from factual clarifications on the special tax treatment in theLand, Baden-Württemberg submits that, even though the tax exemption was only and specifically granted to Spielbank Baden-Baden GmbH & Co. KG, this was the only public casinos operator before 1958 in theLandand thusde factoall operators were tax exempted at that time.
(66) Bavaria argues that the documents provided to the Commission show that the trade tax exemption was granted before 1958 by an indefinite number of communes to an indefinite number of public casinos operators and thus would, in theory, cover all operators in thatLand.
(67) Bavaria also submits that the trade tax exemption results from Article 6(1) of the 1938 law and would thus date back directly to that law.
(68) As regards the existence of State aid, Hamburg argues that the catering activities of the public casinos operators should not be taken into account to qualify those operators as undertakings or not. Hamburg also explains that online gambling is prohibited in Germany so that (illegal) online gambling is not in competition with the services provided by public casinos operators. Hamburg recalls that, as the choice of the public casinos operator in the Land was organised through a tender open to any operator in Europe; there was no tax obstacle for foreign operators.
(69) As regards the qualification of the special tax scheme in thatLandas existing or new, Hamburg submits that the casino tax rate was not reduced because the rate can still reach 90 % of the GGI. Hamburg also explains that, in any event, no proper comparison (between normal tax rules and special tax rules) can be carried out, in particular because the operator would have had behaved differently if it had been subject to another tax system.
(70) Rhineland-Palatinate explains that the ad hoc reductions of the casino tax were justified in the light of the principles laid down in the 1933 law and are necessary to safeguard the viability of the public task carried out by the operator.
(71) Rhineland-Palatinate submits that the corporate tax and income tax rates were reduced in parallel to the decrease of the casino tax. The evolution in time of the entertainment tax cannot be precisely described. The trade tax increased over time. These contradictory evolutions show that no obvious trend can be found as regards normal taxes. The introduction in theLandof a special tax on profit is a timely adaptation of the special tax rules and does not constitute a fundamental change of the special tax rules.
(72) Rhineland-Palatinate submits that, even though the tax exemption was only and specifically granted to theSpielbankin Bad Neuenahr, this was the only public casinos operator before 1958 in that city and thus there was no need to lay down a general exemption. Rhineland-Palatinate also considers that the exemption from communal taxes did not expire because it was regularly renewed.
(73) Regarding theSpielbankin Bad Dürkheim, theLandsubmits that it never paid any municipal taxes before the entry into force of the TFEU(33)and that this fact shows that there must have been a tax exemption.
(74) SBHW submits that the concession contract to operate the public casino entailed various obligations (investment in immovable assets, etc.) which had, together with other regulatory features (smoking ban), a negative impact on the profitability of the business. The ad hoc reductions of the special taxes were necessary to survive and had to be justified to the tax authorities. SBHW paid much more taxes than commercial gambling halls. Public casinos are not in competition with private commercial gambling halls because of legal differences mentioned by the German federal authorities.
(75) The ECA explains that there are many regulatory differences between public casinos and commercial gambling halls (Spielhallen).
(76) The ECA submits that a tax advantage would merely constitute compensation from the State for the services of general economic interest provided by the German public casinos. The casinos have been entrusted by theLänderwith the public task of curbing illegal gambling and providing state-monitored opportunities to satisfy the irrepressible human need to gamble. Public casinos operators are subject to various regulatory restrictions (legal form, need to have a licence, blacklist of addicted players) while commercial gambling halls operator can choose their legal form.
(77) For the ECA, the relevant product market for the determination of threats of distortion of competition is the market for the operation of public casinos. The Commission should first define the relevant product market and cannot simply make unsubstantiated assertions that casino operators compete with amusement arcade operators and with other companies in the broader entertainment market. This contradicts the Commission’s prior decisional practice, according to which there is no uniform market for gambling (Commission Non-opposition decision of 4 June 2004, Comp/M.3373, Point 26 et seq). Table games and slot machines gambling offered by casinos are completely different from commercial slot machines gambling offered in amusement arcades.
(78) According to the ECA, the operation of casinos is legally restricted to the respectiveLandand case-law rejects the possibility of a detrimental effect on trade between Member States in such cases (case T-728/17).
(79) SHSWSN generally submits that the Commission did not sufficiently take into account the factual and legal specificities of public casinos and their differences compared to gambling halls. According to German courts (Federal Administrative Court, BVerwG, 13.6.2013, 9 B 50/12, paragraph 6), these differences justify a differentiated tax treatment.
(80) Public casinos operators carry out a public task. The activity of public casinos forms part of essential functions of the State. There is an obligation to operate public casinos. This would be confirmed by judgments of the German constitutional court (BVerfG, 18.3.1970, 2 BvO 1/65, paragraph 97 f,BVerfG, 18.3.1970, 2 BvO 1/65, paragraph 99 and following). Because the economic aspects of the operation of public casinos are very limited (by comparison with the public policy objective of prevention of addiction), there is no real market for public casinos and this market is restricted to a few suppliers (and does not include commercial gambling halls, BVerfG, 19.7.2000, 1 BvR 539/96, paragraph 70 and 73). Public casinos must be economically operated but the economic aspect is ancillary and inseparable from the public remit activity (case C-138/11, paragraph 38). The existence of a price is not relevant.
(81) Because of the different legal framework, the Federal Constitutional Court considered that there are two different markets, one for public casinos (restricted to public casinos) and one for commercial gambling halls (BVerfG, 19.7.2000, 1 BvR 539/96, paragraph 70, 73). From the point of view of the players, the gambling offer of public casinos is different from the gambling offer of commercial gambling halls and both products are not interchangeable. The public casinos have not been able to detect migration from one type of gambling to another. The two tax systems pursue different objectives and cannot be compared.
(82) Any undertaking from an EU Member State can be granted the concession to operate a public casino. This is the case for the Austrian undertaking Casinos Austria International GmbH operating the public casinos in Niedersachsen.
(83) There is also no distortion of competition on the demand side (clients/players). Public casinos are the only suppliers of table games. The gambling machines operated by public casinos are also fundamentally different from the ones operated by commercial gambling halls.
(84) The effect of the measure is restricted to the territory of each of theLänderas a consequence of the catchment area of the public casinos at stake. According to the Commission (COMP/M.3373 – Accor/Colony/Desseigne-Barriere/JV vom 4. Juni 2004, paragraph 23), players are ready to travel 30 minutes for gambling machines and 60 minutes for table games. Hamburg is 1h49min away from Denmark and 2h57min away from the next Danish casino. Wiesbaden is 2h01min away from Luxemburg and 2h30min away from the next Luxemburgish casino. Public casinos in Niedersachsen are between 0h11min and 3h17min away from the Netherlands and between 0h31min and 3h21min away from the next Dutch casino. Only a very limited number of players of German public casinos are nationals from other EU Member States, and it must be assumed that these players do not come to Germany to play casino games but for some other reasons.
(85) As regards the reference framework, SHSWSN submits that, except for VAT, the reference system chosen by the Commission (the tax law of undertakings,Unternehmenssteuerrecht) is wrong because it does not cover in principle public casinos operators. The tax law of public casinos (Spielbankensteuerrecht) is not an exception or a derogation fromUnternehmenssteuerrecht, both are very different and autonomous tax systems and constitute two sets of general measures.Spielbankensteuerrechtthus rather constitutes its own reference system.
(86) The concept of regional selectivity is also only applicable in one tax system which covers the alleged beneficiary and its competitors. The area of responsibility of a regional institution (here aLand) located within a Member State forms an independent regional reference framework for the selectivity test if it has sufficient autonomy. In the hypothesis of symmetrical devolution of tax powers, the existence of different tax rates is not selective. The two tax systems are imputable to two different legislative competences (federal State andLänder): the only reference framework is the regionalSpielbankensteuerrecht.
(87) As regards the second step of the selectivity test (comparability and derogation), if the reference system is the taxation of public casinos, there is no derogation. Differences of taxation of public casinos between differentLänderis also irrelevant in the light of the regional selectivity reasoning. If one takes the normal taxation of undertakings as reference system, the taxation of public casinos is a derogation but public casinos and gambling halls are not in the same situation.
(88) Because the taxation of public casinos is not part of the reference system used by the Commission (general tax rules), it is impossible to provide a justification in the third step of the selectivity test. If one takes the taxation of public casinos as reference, there are possible justifications: public casinos need to be taxed only to the extent that they keep the ability to always carry out their public task; the prevention of excessive taxation could also be relevant.
(89) The advantage needs to be calculated using the general taxes applicable in the relevantLänderand cities where public casinos are located. Such an abstract calculation is detrimental to the public casinos because they could not adapt to the normal tax rules. In any event, since 2007, there was no advantage for the public casinos in Hamburg, Wiesbaden and Niedersachsen. This shows that the gambling halls are advantaged.
(90) The tax exemptions, the (very limited) reductions of the casino tax and the VAT offsetting mechanism (and, more generally, some necessary flexibility in the setting of the tax rate in order to ensure that public casinos can carry out their public tasks) derive from the 1933 and 1938 laws. The objective and the political aim of the special tax rules have not changed. There were no significant modifications after 1958 or those changes would only be the concretization of possibilities existing before 1958. The existence of a public casino before 1958 is not relevant for the exemption from corporate tax and income tax. A reduction of the casino tax rate alone cannot be used to conclude that there has been a significant change in the system because the taxation (and the profit) of public casinos also depends on other features which cannot be calculated. The evolution of normal tax rules cannot transform unchanged special tax rules into new aid.
(91) The aid would be compatible following the same reasoning as the one in Commission Decision 2012/140/EU (‘the Decision of 20 September 2011’)(34)because the aid would aim at ensuring player protection.
(92) Recovery should in this case be prohibited because it is contrary to the protection of legitimate expectations of the beneficiaries which always paid their taxes and because the special tax rules exist since 1938 and ordering recovery would endanger the public task carried out by public casinos.
(93) FBS argues that there is no competition between public casinos and commercial gambling halls and that the two tax systems are independent. A study by KPMG shows that the tax burden of FBS under the special tax rules is much higher than under the normal tax rules.
(94) FBS considers that the ad hoc reductions are also intrinsically linked with the generally applicable special tax rules laid down in the regional law of public casinos in Hesse. The possibility to reduce the special taxes is a correction mechanism required by the German Constitution in order to prevent excessive taxation (that can arise because the tax base of the special taxes is the GGI, not the profit, so that the principle of taxation on net income (Nettoprinzip) is not complied with under the special tax rules).
(95) According to SBN, public casinos operators are not undertakings. The exclusion of competition via a legal monopoly does not as such exclude the existence of a market and thus the qualification as undertakings (case T-309/12, paragraph 68). However public casinos operators carry out public tasks: in the interest of the State, the casinos are entrusted with the public task of curbing illegal gambling and providing state-monitored opportunities for gambling. There is a public interest in allowing gambling to take place under state supervision. The fact that the operators provide their gambling services against remuneration (gegen Entgelt) does not make them undertakings because their profit is creamed off by their special tax rules. The German Federal Constitutional Court also acknowledged that public casinos operators do not carry out economic activities (BVerfGE 28, 119).
(96) According to SBN, measure 5 (the special tax rules applicable to public casinos operators) does not provide an advantage. Even if one uses the (incorrect) method of the Commission (comparing the special tax rules and the normal tax rules), public casinos operators in Rhineland-Palatinate were subject to a much higher tax burden under their special tax rules in the period 2007 to 2017, so that the special tax rules rather constitute a disadvantage for the public casinos operators or an advantage to the commercial gambling halls (if one follows the views of the Commission that casinos and commercial gambling halls are comparable from a competition point of view).
(97) SBN submits that the measure at stake should be assessed using a full analysis of all relevant, positive and negative parameters of the measures and its context, including the situation of the beneficiary (case T-525/08, paragraph 57 and 60). But the Commission did not take into account the fact that the special tax rules are inextricably linked with the idea that risky gambling is only allowed by the State if carried out in a responsible environment.
(98) For SBN (referring to the heading 3.1.4 of the opening decision), the Commission unduly merged the two criteria of advantage and selectivity.
(99) SBN submits that comparing the special tax rules and the normal tax rules is not the correct method to establish the existence of an advantage in this case because the two tax systems are very different, as the Commission itself acknowledged in its abstract comparison. A concrete comparison is also not the correct method because there are no normal market conditions for public casinos operators (case C-15/14, paragraph 77-79). The reference to assess the existence of an advantage should be found in national tax legislation and should take into account the objective of the tax system. While the normal tax rules pursue a revenue-raising objective, the special tax system applicable to public casinos primarily pursues regulatory purposes. The skimming (Abschöpfung) objective does not mean that the special tax rules will always lead to a disadvantage. It means that, if profit is low, the tax burden can be lower than under the normal tax rules, in order to allow the operator to carry out its public task. But, of course, public casinos are not to be preserved at any cost.
(100) SBN considers that the lack of claw back mechanism is not relevant because the objective of the special tax rules allow – in certain cases – a lower taxation to safeguard the public tasks carried out by the public casinos. The reduction of the casino tax rate in Rhineland-Palatinate was justified by the negative evolution of the public casinos operators’ turnover, their increasing costs, and by the need to take into account their ability to pay as is the case under the normal tax rules. It was meant to safeguard the public tasks carried out by these operators.
(101) SBN considers that the special tax system is its own reference framework as it is very different from the normal tax rules and pursues a regulatory objective. The German legislator had no intention to advantage public casinos operators when it designed the normal tax rules. The Court of Justice also considers that the reference system is the rules that as such would be applicable to the undertakings at stake. The national corporate tax rules are not always the reference (case C-88/03, paragraph 59).
(102) SBN argues that since the special tax system is the correct reference system, the special tax rules are not selective. Public casinos operators are in a specific situation in the light of the regulatory objective pursued by the special tax rules.
(103) SBN also considers that the aim of the special tax rules is not automatically to lead to a higher tax burden, as these rules can lead to under-taxation in certain cases (low profit, establishment phase). Any selectivity of the measures at stake would be justified by the tax law principle prohibiting excessive taxation.
(104) SBN submits that also measures 2.b and 4.c are not selective because they are covered by the objective of the special tax rules to tax public casinos operators only until the economic viability limits (Wirtschaftlichkeitsgrenze). The ad hoc decisions to reduce the special taxes are targeted measures for reasons of equity and to prevent hardships and which are meant to keep the casinos viable. A private operator would also have granted such a measure to keep the casinos alive because it would not have wanted to act against the regulatory purpose of offering regulated access to risky games in public casinos.
(105) SBN submits that public casinos operators have a monopoly. Operators of regular gambling machines such as commercial gambling halls may be in competition with public casinos operators to the extent they all offer games of chance but this is not sufficient for State aid purposes. The interchangeability of the products by reason of the products’ characteristics, their prices and their intended use is decisive. But the two products at stake are different.
(106) SBN also argues that the public casinos operators’ activities are purely local activities. In the period 2007 to 2017, the proportion of foreign players was within a range of 3,22 % and 6,34 % for the casino in Bad Neuenahr and within a range of 1,63 % und 3,32 % for the casino in Bad Dürkheim. Players interested in table games would travel from a distance of 50 to 100 km while clients interested in casinos’ gambling machines would travel from a distance of 30 to 50 km.
(107) SBN considers that the measures at stake, if aid, would be compatible under Article 107(3), point (b), TFEU. They pursue an objective of general interest, namely to limit the risks of gambling. They are necessary, proportionate and appropriate because they do not cause distortions of competition.
(108) The measures at stake are, according to SBN, existing measures because they are based on Article 6 of the 1938 law. Subsequent changes did not change the core of that provision and were inherent to the system.
(109) The complainants contest the method and the outcome of the concrete comparison mentioned by the Commission in recital (95) and following of the opening decision.
(110) The complainants further argue that the gambling machines operated by public casinos, which are more dangerous from the perspective of player protection (according to theBundeszentrale für gesundheitliche Aufklärung(36)), shoulda fortioribe subject to the entertainment tax, given that the gambling machines operated by gambling halls are subject to this tax while being less dangerous.
(111) The complainants also argue, in the context of measure 3, that the profit-skimming (Gewinnabschöpfung) laid down by the regional law on public casinos in North Rhine-Westphalia is not a tax and should not be taken into account in the tax burden under the special tax rules. They submit that only the German law is relevant to qualify a measure as a tax and that the profit-skimming does not actually pursue the aims of the special tax system applicable to public casinos (i.e.AbgeltungandAbschöpfung).
(112) The complainants consider that the Commission did not clarify certain aspects of the VAT offsetting mechanism. For the complainants, the Commission failed to examine their argument that the obligation to pay VAT had no economic consequence for the public casinos. It is also still unclear whether public casinos use the right to deduct input VAT even though this is not necessary since, even if they did not use that right, they would save the amount of input tax through a reduction of the casino tax. Some revenues of the public casinos (such as entrance fees) are not taxed at all, which the Commission should investigate.
(113) The German federal authorities consider that the fight against gambling addiction is pursued through the regulatory framework of the public casinos, not through the taxation. Thus an additional taxation of public casinos under entertainment tax is not necessary. They contest the view of the complainants that the profit-skimming in North Rhine-Westphalia is not a tax. The profit-skimming is a tax following the relevant provision of the tax ordinance (Abgabenordnung, see Article 3(1) of that ordinance).
(114) The German authorities consider that the comments made by the ECA mainly support their own position but stress again that the normal tax rules do not constitute the reference for the taxation of public casinos.
(115) They also mostly agree with the comments submitted by the public casinos operators.
(116) According to the case-law of the Court of Justice, several interventions of the State must be regarded as a ‘single intervention’ in particular when ‘having regard to their chronology, their purpose and the circumstances of the undertaking at the time of those interventions’, they are so closely linked to each other that they are ‘inseparable’ from one another(37). The Commission has a duty to consider complex measures in their entirety in order to determine whether they confer on the recipient undertaking an economic advantage which it would not have obtained under normal market conditions(38). When a public intervention entails different (positive and negative) consequences for an undertaking, the Commission must take into account the cumulative effect of these consequences to assess the existence of an advantage(39).
(117) In that regard, as explained in Section 2.2.3, both the special taxes applicable to the public casinos operators and the exemptions from normal taxes are of the same nature (tax measures, see recital (158)). They are, in eachLand, the two non-severable parts or components of one complex measure (one perLand) and are therefore assessed together. The special tax rules applicable to the public casinos operators are defined in eachLandand include also the reductions of the casino tax and of other special taxes.
(118) This Decision concerns the 16 special tax schemes applicable to public casinos operators in the 16Länder(40)(‘the measures’), encompassing in eachLand:
(a) the overall special tax treatment generally applicable to public casinos operators operating in thatLandincluding a positive aspect (the special taxes imposed on public casinos operators) and a negative aspect (the exemptions from normally applicable taxes) (measure 5). This special tax treatment also includes the generally applicable reductions of the special taxes imposed on the public casinos operators, which are automatic and laid down in laws of theLänder, namely the reduction of the casino tax to offset the VAT (measure 1) and, if any, the reduction of the casino tax in the case of new public casinos' openings (measure 2.a) and/or in other circumstances (measure 4.b); and
(b) the ad hoc decisions of the public authorities to reduce the special taxes applicable to certain public casinos operators, if any (measure 2.b and measure 4.c). These reductions are intrinsically linked with the special tax treatment applicable to the public casinos operators and must therefore be assessed as part of the 16 schemes. Formally, the legal basis to provide such reductions is indeed laid down in the same law of theLänderas the one laying down the other features of the special tax treatment. More substantially, these ad hoc reductions cannot be assessed on their own because they merely reduce the tax burden arising from the special tax rules, without it being possible to determine whether these ad hoc reductions as such provide an advantage compared to the normal tax rules (see recital (137) of the opening decision). Furthermore, in order to adapt the tax burden of the public casinos operators, it is a mere formal choice of the public authorities of theLänderto choose between a direct change to the scheme, i.e. of the tax features laid down in the law on public casinos, or a reduction of the tax burden through the adoption of ad hoc measures. Germany also underlined that the ad hoc measures followed the same overall objective as the special tax treatment.
(119) As regards the VAT offsetting mechanisms, the opening decision noted that public casinos operators have been subject to VAT since 2006 (recital (123) of the opening decision), while before 2006 they were formally exempted from VAT but the casino tax they paid was meant to replace all normal taxes, including VAT (footnote 66 of the opening decision). It was also noted that the VAT offsetting mechanisms could not be assessed in isolation from VAT obligations of the public casinos operators, leading to the finding that the 2006 reform encompassing both items was neutral (recitals (124) and (125) of the opening decision). As a consequence, the 2006 reform may only have maintained an existing advantage related to the special tax rules to which public casinos operators are subject, an issue included in the assessment of measure 5 on which the Commission opened the formal investigation procedure. Finally, the opening decision noted that focussing on the VAT offsetting mechanism in isolation from the related VAT obligation of public casinos did not allow a finding of an advantage as those mechanisms merely reduced the level of special taxes, without any reference to the relevant benchmark which are the normal tax rules (recital (126) of the opening decision).
(120) According to Article 107(1)TFEU, ‘any aid granted by a Member State or through State resources in any form whatsoever which distorts or threatens to distort competition by favouring certain undertakings or the production of certain goods shall, in so far as it affects trade between Member States, be incompatible with the internal market.’
(121) The qualification of a measure as aid within the meaning of Article 107(1) TFEU requires the following cumulative conditions to be met: (i) the measure must be imputable to the State and financed through State resources; (ii) it must confer an advantage to an undertaking; (iii) that advantage must be selective; and (iv) the measure must distort or threaten to distort competition and affect trade between Member States.
(122) To constitute State aid, a measure must both be imputable to the State and financed through State resources.
(123) The measures are tax measures, imputable to a public authority (central State/Länder/municipalities, see Section 2.2). They also involve public resources, to the extent the public authorities that collect these taxes forego revenues, which they would otherwise collect from an undertaking in normal circumstances(41).
(124) The German public casinos offer services (especially gambling services and gambling related services(42)) against remuneration (entrance fees, a fraction of the bets served in the form of winnings, prices), which is not contested by Germany or the public casinos operators(43). They offer those services on a market (see Section 4.2.3 about distortion of competition). They are thus undertakings carrying out economic activities for State aid purposes.
(125) The fact that national law or national courts would not have regarded public casinos’ gambling activities as economic activities is not relevant, to the extent this qualification was not carried out in the light of Article 107(1) TFEU(44). Judgments of German courts issued in other contexts made different findings; for instance, the German Federal Constitutional Court also found that the operation of a public casino is without doubt ‘profit-oriented’ and that public casino operators are undertakers/undertakings (Unternehmer)(45); in another judgment, the same tribunal qualified the operation of public casinos as a mere ‘occupation/profession’(46). In the same vein, public casinos operators would be subject to trade tax (if they were not exempted), while this tax only applies to ‘business enterprises’ and entities carrying out an ‘economic business’(47). In addition, gambling operators are in principle taxable persons for VAT purposes according to Council Directive 2006/112/EC(48). Furthermore, in a number ofLänder, public casinos operators are regular private-law undertakings owned by private owners.
(126) The Commission already considered that gambling activities (and in particular the activities of casinos) are economic activities pursuant to Article 107(1) TFEU(49).
(127) The alleged fact that public casinos operators are not active ‘on a market’ (because gambling is prohibited in Germany and because only public casinos operators are allowed to offer the games they provide) will be examined (and rebutted) in Section 4.2.3 about distortion of competition. It is also sufficient to note that the alleged exclusion of competition via a legal monopoly does not as such exclude the existence of a market and thus the qualification as undertaking(50).
(128) Germany and certain public casinos operators broadly(51)argue that public casinos operators are entrusted with the public task of offering gambling under State supervision in order to channel the gambling instinct of the population by means of a legal offer. Public casinos operators would perform essential function of the State and carrying out their activities would be mandatory. The Court of Justice however only regarded a few activities as being non-economic in nature and essential functions of the State (police, air navigation safety or the organisation, financing and enforcement of prison sentences); providing gambling services is not part of them. In addition, at least in a number ofLänder, public casinos operators are private-law undertakings and are not necessarily owned by the public authorities(52), which shows that the activities at stake are not essential functions of the State (or of the public authorities in general). Moreover, in certainLänder, public casinos operators went bankrupt (see recital (144) of the opening decision) and there were no public casinos in certainLänderfor several years (Thuringia, Mecklenburg-Vorpommern). This shows that providing gambling services is not an obligation of the public authorities and that the legal offer (meant to channel the gambling instinct of the population) described by Germany was inexistent in those cases. Gambling services of public casinos operators being sometimes not provided or not to be provided at any cost, it cannot be argued that those activities are ‘essential functions of the State’(53). It may be true that thepublic authorities’ (Länder)activity toregulategambling in public casinos in eachLandis an essential function of the public authorities(54). However, this activity of theLänderis different from the activity of providing gambling services by public casinos operators as such. The mere fact that an economic activity is regulated by the public authorities does not prevent it from being qualified as economic activity. This is confirmed by the German courts(55).
(129) A measure granted by the State is considered to distort or threaten to distort competition when it is liable to improve the competitive position of the recipient compared to other undertakings with which it competes(56). A distortion of competition is generally found to exist when the State grants a financial advantage to an undertaking in a liberalised sector where there is, or could be, competition(57). Public support is liable to distort competition even if it does not help the recipient undertaking to expand and gain market share. It is enough that the aid allows it to maintain a stronger competitive position than it would have had if the aid had not been provided.
(130) When the Commission assesses aid schemes, it does not need to check that the criterion of distortion of competition is actually met in all individual cases, for all beneficiaries of the scheme.
(131) The measures are liable to distort competition.
(132) Such measures indeed favour certain economic operators over their competitors in a market where at least some competition exists or can exist. The fact that the public casinos operators would benefit from a legal monopoly to provide the games they offer does not alter that finding. The games they offer are at least to a certain extent in competition with the ones offered by other operators, even if they are not exactly the same. In particular, public casinos operators are to some extent in competition with gambling halls (in particular as regards gambling machines) and with other undertakings in the broad market of games of chance and the broader market of entertainment. Even for table games, public casinos operators are to some extent in competition with gambling halls, online operators and casinos from other Member States.
(133) The market at stake is not limited to gambling in German public casinos. Even though, as argued by the German authorities, the games offered in public casinos can only be offered in Germany by public casinos (legal monopoly), and even though the gambling machines operated by the public casinos operators and by the commercial gambling halls are not exactly the same (see recital (13)), public casinos operators are to a certain extent in competition with commercial gambling halls, in particular when they offer gambling machines and provide related services. This is evidenced by consistent and repeated statements by public casinos operators themselves and their business association(58), by judgments of the German courts(59)and by reports of other German public institutions(60).
(134) One public casino operator (SBN) acknowledges in its comments that operators of regular gambling machines such as commercial gambling halls may be in competition with public casinos operators to the extent they all offer games of chance. But it argues, on the basis of the Commission Notice on the definition of relevant market for the purposes of Community competition law(61), that such a ‘competition relationship’ is not sufficient for State aid purposes: the interchangeability of the products by reason of the products’ characteristics, their prices and their intended use would be decisive. The Commission Notice however explicitly acknowledges that ‘elements of the approach outlined here might serve as a basis for the assessment of State aid cases’ only ‘when consideration of market power and therefore of the relevant market are raised’, which is not the case here. On the contrary, it is in general not relevant (and it is not necessary) to define a ‘market’ in terms of product substitutability in State aid cases(62).
(135) The alleged fact that gambling halls and public casinos would operate on different markets according to the Commission’s own decisional practice is irrelevant and wrong. The Commission Decision mentioned by ECA is a merger decision, not a State aid decision. In addition, even if that decision left open the question whether gambling machines and table games were in the same market (for mergers purposes), it explicitly stated that the Commission already acknowledged that there was one market for gambling machines(63)and it is not contested that both gambling halls and public casinos operate gambling machines (these represent around 75 % and up to 100 % of the public casinos’ total gambling turnover).
(136) Some public casinos operators (and the German association of public casinos itself) even consider that public casinos are in competition with operators providing other game of chances than gambling machines (such as sports betting) and even with operators providing leisure activities in general(64).
(137) Public casinos operators are also at least to a certain extent in competition with online gambling operators offering casino games or other games of chance(65). Even though certain public casinos operators argued that online gambling was illegal in Germany, the legal basis they refer to provides for certain exceptions(66)and online gambling became legal in 2021(67).
(138) In addition, even if one considers that casino games are only in competition with casino games (which the Commission contests), there is to a certain extent competition between German public casinos themselves(68)and between German public casinos and foreign casinos(69).
(139) As the services provided by public casinos operators are in competition with other services, paragraph 188 of the Commission Notice on the notion of State aid (legal monopoly) is not applicable.
(140) In the light of the above, the measures are liable to distort or threaten to distort competition.
(141) According to well-established case-law of the Court of Justice, it is not necessary to demonstrate that an aid has an actual effect on trade between Member States, but only that it is liable to affect such trade(70). In particular, the Court of Justice has ruled that where State aid ‘strengthens the position of an undertaking as compared with other undertakings competing in intra-[Union] trade, the latter must be regarded as affected by the aid’(71).
(142) Furthermore, public support can have an effect on trade between Member States even if the recipient is not directly involved in cross-border trade. A subsidy may for example make it more difficult for operators in other Member States to enter the market(72). Even a subsidy provided to an undertaking that provides only local or regional services may have an effect on trade where undertakings from other Member States could provide such services (also using the freedom of establishment) and the possibility is not purely hypothetical(73).
(143) The measures are liable to affect intra-Union trade.
(144) When the Commission assesses aid schemes, it does not need to check that the criterion of effect on trade is actually met in all individual cases, for all beneficiaries of the scheme and whatever the amounts of aid at stake. In that regard, it is sufficient to note that (i) public casinos and gambling halls are at least to some extent in competition, (ii) nothing prevents public casinos and commercial gambling halls from being operated close to each other (in the same city for example) and this is often factually the case, and (iii) nothing prevents such gambling halls from being operated or owned by foreign undertakings. Thus, a selective advantage to public casinos is liable to affect intra-Union trade by making it more difficult for companies from other Member States to enter the market and operate gambling halls in Germany.
(145) As a matter of fact, many gambling halls in Germany are operated by foreign undertakings(74). Furthermore, it is not contested that, in fact, at least one of the public casinos operated by each public casinos operator is located close to one or several commercial gambling halls which are or could be operated by undertakings from other Member States.
(146) An advantage for public casinos operators is also such as to help them to attract foreign customers, especially in border regions. Attracting foreign customers (not only in border regions but more generally in all cities with a public casinos, for instance spa cities of international reputation) was historically one of the aims of the 1933 law allowing the operation of public casinos(75). Still today, public casinos are mostly located in places attracting foreign customers(76)such as major cities, touristic cities, airports(77)or border regions.
(147) Using their strengthened financial situation, public casinos operators can also more easily enter foreign markets(78)or attract foreign investment(79).
(148) The German federal authorities and some public casinos operators argue that the effects of the measures are purely local and do not have more than marginal effects on cross-border investments or cross-border establishment. They explain in that regard that, because of the geographic location of most of the public casinos, it is unlikely that clients from other Member States would travel to the German public casinos only to play there (public casinos located close to the border are a minority of cases that should be ignored). This line of reasoning is however not relevant when aid schemes are at stake, in particular when such schemes are not legally restricted to cases in which their effects would be purely local and would not have more than marginal effects on cross-border investments or cross-border establishment. In addition, whether or not clients from other Member States would travel to the German public casinosonlyto play there is not the relevant criterion: what matters is whether or not the increased attractiveness of German public casinos is liable to (even marginally) influence foreign customers’ behaviour. Furthermore, one of the main effects on intra-Union trade in this case concerns the limitation to the establishment and operation of gambling halls by foreign operators, while these gambling halls are (as explained in recital (145)) or at least can be operated close to public casinos. In that context pointing to an effect on trade, Germany and the relevant public casinos operators do not explain how the measures could not have an impact on cross-border investments or cross-border establishment.
(149) Germany and the public casinos operators in question rather merely focus on the impact of the measures on consumers or on other casinos. The public casinos operators in Hamburg, Wiesbaden (in Hesse) and Lower Saxony only submitted information about the distance between their casinos and the next border or the next foreign casino(80). In the same vein, the operator of the public casinos in Bad Neuenahr and Bad Dürkheim (in Rhineland-Palatinate) merely submitted that the proportion of foreign players would range from 1 % to 6 %(81).
(150) Given the characteristics of the measures, the aid schemes as such are liable to affect trade between Member States. Moreover in the light of the possible effect on foreign investment/establishment in gambling halls (and in public casinos, when it is legally possible(82)), it is likely that all the individual aids granted under the schemes have more than marginal effects on trade. It is nota prioriexcluded to find individual situations where the aid has no effect on trade(83). However, the identification of such situations belongs to the implementation phase.
(151) Consequently, it is considered that the measures are liable to have an effect on intra-Union trade.
(152) To assess the existence of an advantage, the financial situation of the undertaking following the measure should be compared with its financial situation if the measure had not been taken(84). According to the case-law of the Court of Justice, the concept of aid embraces not only positive benefits, but also measures which in various forms mitigate the charges which are normally included in the budget of an undertaking(85). As regards fiscal measures, an advantage may be granted through different types of reduction in a company’s tax burden(86). Although a measure that entails an exemption from or a reduction of a tax does not involve a positive transfer of resources from the State, it gives rise to an advantage because it places the undertakings to which it applies in a more favourable financial position than other taxpayers and results in a loss of income to the State(87). In particular, in relation to tax measures, in order to evidence a possible tax advantage, it is necessary to assess whether the tax treatment granted to an entity provides it with an advantage in comparison to the normal tax rules(88).
(153) To be considered State aid, a measure must be selective, in the sense that it must favour only certain undertakings or the production of certain goods. According to established case-law of the Court of Justice, the assessment of the material selectivity of a measure takes place in three steps. First, it is necessary to identify and examine the common or normal regime (‘reference system’, ‘system of reference’ or ‘reference framework’) applicable in the Member State concerned. Second, it is in relation to this common or ‘normal’ tax regime that it is necessary to assess and determine if any advantage granted by the tax measure at issue may be selective. This has to be done by demonstrating that the measure derogates from that common regime inasmuch as it differentiates between economic operators that, in the light of the objective pursued by that regime, are in a comparable factual and legal situation. Third, if such derogation exists, it is necessary to examine whether it results from the nature or general scheme of the taxation system of which it forms part and could hence be justified by the nature or logic of the system. In this context, it is for the Member State to show that the differentiated tax treatment derives directly from the basic or guiding principles of that system.
(154) In tax matters, contrary to what Germany argues(89), the assessment of the advantage is thus linked to the assessment of the selectivity criterion, to the extent the existence of a derogatory tax treatment is also assessed in comparison to the reference framework, that is to say the normal tax rules. As also stressed by the Court of Justice(90), the determination of the reference framework is of particular importance in the case of tax measures since the very existence of an advantage may be established only when compared with ‘normal’ taxation. The Commission will thus first present in Section 4.2.5.1 the normal tax rules (reference framework), against which the measures need to be assessed (both for the advantage criterion and for the selectivity criterion). The Commission will then assess the advantage criterion (Section 4.2.5.2) and the selectivity criterion (Section 4.2.5.2.3).
(155) As the Court of Justice ruled in theWorld Duty Freecase(91), the determination of the reference framework must follow from an objective examination of the content, the structure and the specific effects of the applicable rules under the national law of that Member State. Where the tax measure in question is inseparable from the general tax system of the Member State concerned, reference must be made to that system. On the other hand, where it appears that such a measure is clearly severable from that general system, it cannot be ruled out that the reference framework to be taken into account may be more limited than that general system, or even that it may equate to the measure itself, where the latter appears as a rule having its own legal logic and it is not possible to identify a consistent body of rules external to that measure. It is the Member State concerned which defines, by exercising its exclusive competence in the matter of direct taxation, the characteristics constituting the tax. The determination of the reference system or the ‘normal’ tax regime, on the basis of which it is necessary to analyse the condition relating to selectivity, must take account of those characteristics. It must also be borne in mind that, in so far as the determination of the reference framework must be based on an objective examination of the content and structure of the applicable rules under national law, it is not necessary to take account of the objectives pursued by the legislature when adopting the measure under examination.
(156) As described in more detail in Section 2.2.2, the corporate tax and personal income tax – with the solidarity surcharge – and the trade tax are the taxes that apply generally to all undertakings on their income in Germany(92). Those taxes are applicable to public casinos operators when they carry out non-gambling related activities. Those taxes use as tax base and aim at taxing the profit(93). This was not contested by Germany. While the tax rates of corporate tax/personal income tax and of the solidarity surcharge are laid down uniformly at national level, the municipalities can set (within certain limits) the rate of the trade tax. The normal tax rules may thus vary depending on the location of the operator (the trade tax rate depends on the location of the operator) and its legal form (corporate tax and personal income tax are alternatively applied depending on an entity’s legal form(94)).
(157) In addition, undertakings offering entertainment and in particular gambling services are also – except in Bavaria where the entertainment tax was abolished as from 1980 – generally subject to a specific municipal tax on entertainment (entertainment tax). The features of such taxes are laid down at municipal level, sometimes within the framework (maximum or minimum rate, tax base) set by theLandwhich, most of the time, devolves most of its tax competence to the municipalities. The applicable entertainment tax rules thus also depend on the location of the operator.
(158) As described in more detail in Section 2.2.3, public casinos operators are explicitly exempted from those normal taxes which would otherwise apply. The normal taxes are, for public casinos operators, deemed to be paid through the special taxes imposed on them (Abgeltung) and described in Section 2.2.1. All the measures described in Section 2.2.1 (casino tax, additional taxes on the GGI, additional tax on the annual profit etc.) are compulsory payments generally applicable to all public casinos operators (in theLandconcerned), they are laid down unilaterally by theLänderin their laws, and the sums collected are transferred to theLänderwithout any counterpart. In view of the German law, they therefore qualify as taxes(95). Those taxes serve to replace the normal taxes from which the public casinos operators are exempted (Abgeltung) and to skim/cream off the profit of public casinos operators for purposes of public benefit (Abschöpfung). As regards the argument raised by the German federal authorities that the two different tax systems (normal tax rules vs specific tax rules for public casinos) have different objectives because the normal tax rules aim at generating revenue without obligation as to the use of the revenue while the taxes collected under the special tax rules should be used for charitable purposes, the Commission notes that the alleged destination of the special taxes (charitable purpose) does not change the fact that these taxes are meant to replace the normal taxes.
(159) The taxes described in Section 2.2.2 constitute the normal tax rules because they apply generally to all undertakings in Germany (for corporate tax, trade tax and the related surcharges) or generally to the entertainment sector (for the entertainment tax). In the absence of the special tax rules applicable to public casinos operators (in particular the explicit tax exemptions they benefit from), these operators would be subject to these normal taxes. The measures in question are inseparable from the general tax system, given the explicit reference to the normal taxes by way of the exemption from those taxes and the skimming and replacement logic of the measures which can only be understood by comparison or reference to the normal tax rules. This is also evidenced by the 1938 law and the laws of theLänderon public casinos which always lay down at the same time these two inextricably linked parts of the complex measure (at least in the form of principles in the 1938 law), namely the special taxes and the exemption from normal taxes. As the measures are inseparable from the general tax system of the Member State concerned, reference must be made to that system to assess advantage and selectivity.
(160) Furthermore, the tax treatment of public casinos operators cannot be considered as a separate system of reference as it is not simply a special purpose levy that would come – following its own specific logic – in addition to the normal taxes. On the contrary, it is meant to replace the normal tax rules. If the measures at stake were simply the additional special taxes applicable to public casinos operators, without the exemptions from normal taxes, these special taxes could on their own be regarded as a separate system of reference following its own logic (special purpose levy). This is, however, not the case as the special taxes are intrinsically linked with the tax exemptions and are supposed to replace the normal taxes.
(161) Germany and several interested parties consider that the tax rules to which public casinos operators are subject (casino tax, etc.) are the reference framework that should be taken into account for the assessment of the advantage and the selectivity of the measures. They additionally and alternatively argue that there is no reference or that there are no normal market conditions so that no selective advantage can be identified. In particular, the German federal authorities broadly argue that the normal taxes do not in principle apply to public casinos operators, which are an ‘exceptional phenomenon’ and very different from gambling halls so that there is no common reference system (and the special tax system for public casinos operators is its own reference framework). They add that, according to the case-law, the normal tax rules can only be the reference system for persons to whom those rules would in principle apply.
(162) The German authorities however do not explain at all why and to what extent the normal taxes would not apply to public casinos operators. It is clear that the normal taxes would apply to public casinos operators if they were not explicitly exempted from these taxes by the measures. It is noteworthy in that regard to observe that public casinos operators are subject (without any difference or adaptation) to the normal tax rules when they provide services other than gambling services. The Commission also notes, as regards the taxation of public casinos operators’ gambling activities, that it was necessary to lay down explicit exemptions from the normal taxes so that public casinos operators do not pay those taxes which would otherwise normally apply to them and even applied to them in the past when there were no tax exemptions(96). The tax exemptions in question have a substantial effect (without them, public casinos operators would pay the normal taxes) and not a mere formal or declaratory nature (a case in which removing these exemptions would not change the situation because, for example, public casinos operators would be exempted from the same taxes following other more general tax rules)(97). German courts also took the view that, in the absence of the special tax rules, public casinos operators would be subject to the normal tax rules, also because the special taxes (casino tax and possibly other special taxes) are explicitly regarded as a replacement for the normal taxes(98).
(163) More generally, it is always possible – as Germany does – to find specificities characterising certain undertakings or certain economic sectors (be it only their particular activities or the non-fiscal regulatory framework applicable to them). Such specificities are not sufficient to consider that these undertakings or sectors would be subject to their own reference system when normal taxes would apply to them following the normal tax rules. The different factual and legal situation of certain undertakings can however be relevant to a certain extent in the second step of the analysis which will be assessed in Section 4.2.5.3.1.
(164) In an attempt to limit the relevance of the explicit tax exemptions for the selectivity reasoning (they create an obvious link to the normal tax rules and represent a derogation from these rules), Germany also argues that those exemptions are not the cause of the different tax treatment but a mere consequence of the special taxes (with the aim to avoid double taxation). This however does not change the fact that, in the absence of these tax exemptions, public casinos operators would be subject to the normal taxes as these operators and activities normally fall within their usual scope of application.
(165) The fact also remains that the special taxes paid by public casinos are meant to replace the normal tax rules (Abgeltung), which again points to the fact that these normal tax rules are the relevant reference framework. It is not the mere existence of special taxes (and of the different tax treatment) that justifies the exemption from normal taxes. It is the fact that the special taxes are meant to replace the normal taxes. Only in that case the tax exemptions are the logical consequence of the special taxes, in the light of the need to prevent double taxation(99). In addition, the existence of special taxes is only justified by the fact that the normal tax rules could not achieve a sufficiently high level of skimming of the public casinos’ profit(100). Therefore, the design and the logic of the special tax treatment (replacement and skimming,AbgeltungandAbschöpfung)can only be understood by reference to the level of taxation under normal tax rules and thus to the normal tax rules.
(166) It is thus true that the tax exemptions are a consequence of the special taxes. But the exemptions are only justified and so to speak ‘neutral’ (that is, merely preventing double taxation) if the special taxes indeed replace the normal taxes and do not lead to a tax burden lower than under the normal tax rules (because, in the latter case, there cannot be ‘double taxation’). As nothing ensures that the special taxes will lead to at least the same tax burden as under the normal tax rules (see recital (177); Germany even alleges that, in the case of low profits, the special tax rules may or even should lead to lower taxation than under the normal tax rules), the tax exemptions cannot be regarded as simply preventing double taxation. Those tax exemptions are not simply a logical consequence of the existence of special taxes. They go beyond a mere prevention of double taxation: they allow non-taxation up to the difference between the tax burden under the normal tax rules and the tax burden under the special taxes. They are thus not neutral for the assessment and should be fully taken into account. To the extent Germany’s argument would aim at justifying the measure by the logic of the tax system (third step of the selectivity reasoning), it is examined in Section 4.2.5.3.2.
(167) In the context of the advantage criterion, SBN also submits that the two tax systems are very different, that there are no normal market conditions for public casinos operators as in theKernkraftwerke Lippe-Emscase(101), and that the reference to assess the existence of an advantage should be found in national tax legislation and take into account the objective of the special tax system. These arguments boil down to contesting that the normal tax rules as described in Section 4.2.5.1 are the reference to be used to assess the existence of an advantage and of the selective character of the measures. It is thus relevant to assess them together with the other arguments related to the reference system used by the Commission. The arguments raised by SBN are however ineffective to the extent that SBN does not contest that, in the absence of the special tax rules for public casinos operators, those operators would be subject to the normally applicable taxes following the general rules of taxation applicable in Germany. SBN also does not explain why the normal tax rules as described in Section 4.2.5.1 are not the reference. In that regard, the fact that the two tax systems would be very different does not mean that normal tax rules as described in Section 4.2.5.1 are not the reference, it simply means that the tax rules applicable to public casinos operators are different, which supports the idea that they constitute a derogation from those normal tax rules. The reference made by SBN to theKernkraftwerke Lippe-Ems GmbHcase is not relevant because that case-law did not deal with exemptions fromnormallyapplicable taxes (and special taxes replacing the latter) but with specialadditionaltaxes for certain operators (the special taxes were not meant to replace the normal taxes, contrary to the situation in the present case where the operators are exempted from the normal taxes). Furthermore, the regulatory objective of the special taxes (casino tax, etc.) is not relevant(102)for the identification of the reference framework and the normal market conditions (normal taxation).
(168) In their comments, certain interested parties (SHSWSN) refer to the case-law of the Court of Justice on symmetrical devolution of tax powers and regional selectivity. They explain that the two tax systems (normal tax rules and special tax rules) are imputable to two different legislative competences (federal State andLänder) so that the only possible reference framework is the special tax system.
(169) Contrary to what is claimed by SHSWSN, it is straightforward to identify a reference framework in this case, because the special taxes are meant to replace the normal taxes from which the public casinos operators are explicitly exempted (see Section 2.2.3).
(170) The case-law of the Court of Justice about regional selectivity mentioned by SHSWSN(103)is also not relevant in this case because the German Federal State did not (generally) devolve (symmetrically or not) to infra-State entities the power to set the tax rules applicable to (all) undertakings within the territory of these infra-State entities. For all operators other than public casinos operators, there are no special tax rules laid down by theLänderthat would replace the normal taxes such as corporate tax, income tax or trade tax. Even public casinos operators are subject to the normal tax rules when they provide services other than gambling services or services that are closely related to gambling services. TheLänderare not in general the competent authority to define the normal tax rules (in particular for VAT, corporate tax, income tax and trade tax) applicable in their respective territories, even for public casinos operators.
(171) Moreover, at least a part of the special tax measures (the exemption from corporate tax and income tax and trade tax) is laid down by the State in national/federal laws and public casinos operators are (also for their gambling activities) subject to VAT, the same as all other undertakings. Thus, it is not correct to claim that the special tax system of public casinos operators would only be set by theLänder. It is also incorrect to claim that the normal tax rules are imputable only to the (federal) State: theLändercan decide to levy or not an entertainment tax, and can decide on the exemptions from municipal taxes for public casinos (trade tax and entertainment tax); the cities can set the rates of the trade tax and, within the framework defined at the level of theLand, they can set the features (tax base and tax rate) of the entertainment tax. Thus, using their competence, theLändercan shape, at least to a certain extent, both the normal and the special tax rules. In the same vein, the State is also involved in the taxation of public casinos: the State is competent as regards corporate tax and income tax (currently it grants an exemption from those taxes pursuant to Article 6(1) of the 1938 law) and VAT (until 2006, the State exempted public casinos from VAT).
(172) Overall, it is thus incorrect to claim that there would be two tax systems (normal tax rules and special tax rules) imputable to two different legislative competences that would each be competent to define a specific reference framework applicable to materially different entities: competences mostly overlap in this case.
(173) This Decision however acknowledges the tax competence of theLänderwith regard to public casinos operators (eachLandhas specific rules on the casino tax for instance) by assessing individually each scheme (the special tax rules applicable to public casinos operators) at the level of theLandand with regard to the normal tax rules applicable in thatLand. This Decision also acknowledges the tax competence of the cities by taking into account the situation in each municipality as regards the normal tax rules that would apply to public casinos operators (tax rate of the trade tax, tax rate, tax base and other tax features of the entertainment tax).
(174) To assess whether the measures lead to an advantage, it is necessary to compare (the tax burden arising from) the special tax rules to (the tax burden arising from) the normal tax rules as set out in Section 4.2.5.1.
(175) In order to determine whether a tax scheme provides an advantage, it is usually sufficient to compareex antethe legal features of the measure under assessment with the normal tax rules. In cases involving a measure derogating from the normal tax rules, in particular in theFrance Telecom(104)andFútbol Club Barcelonacases(105), the Court of Justice ruled that the advantage criterion is already met when a scheme grants a mere ‘potential’ advantage which may materialise only in certain circumstances. The Court noted that considering that the measures examined in these cases only involve State aid if an actual advantage materialises in all tax years under the scheme would amount to rewarding non-transparent forms of aid and favouring Member States which violate the standstill clause within the meaning of Article 108(3) TFEU. In particular, the fact that, for each tax year, the actual existence of an advantage (its specific amount) depends on external and random circumstances does not prevent the Commission from concluding that the measure provides an advantage(106).
(176) The case at hand is, as already explained in the opening decision(107), similar to theFrance TelecomandFútbol Club Barcelonacases, to the extent it is impossible to concludeex antethat the special tax rules (combination of the tax exemptions and of the special taxes where the special taxes do not relate directly to the normal tax rules, contrary to a reduced rate for example) will automatically, generally and always lead to an actual advantage (or disadvantage). The amount of tax paid under the normal tax system and under the special taxes depends on random circumstances or choices freely made by the operators, which are not legal features of the tax regime that can be assessedex ante. There is a possibility that the special tax rules may lead to an actual advantage in certain circumstances, which is sufficient to conclude that the measures provide an advantage for State aid purposes.
(177) In particular, because a specific group of operators is subject to a special tax treatment (the special tax schemes of theLänderapplicable only to public casinos operators which replace the normally applicable tax rules), and because there is no general provision (such as a claw-back or offsetting mechanism(108)) automatically preventing that the special tax treatment is more advantageous compared to the normal tax rules, this regime provides an advantage to this group of operators.
(178) Germany argues that theFrance Telecomcase-law is not relevant because the beneficiary in that case was subject to the normal tax rules except for specific aspects. The Commission considers that that case-law is relevant as public casinos are also subject to the normal tax rules when they carry out any activity other than gambling activities. They are also subject to normal tax rules (such as VAT) for their gambling activities, except for the aspects examined in this Decision. In any event, inFrance Telecom, the Court did not make its assessment dependent on the fact that the beneficiary was, except for the measure at stake, subject to the normal tax rules.
(179) Several public casinos operators (SHSWSN, FBS, SBN) submit that they did not benefit from an advantage under their special tax rules because they would have borne a lower tax burden under the normal tax rules. However, as follows from the case law(109), the question of thematerialisationof the advantage, i.e. whether the measures have actually conferred an advantage on its beneficiaries taken individually, is only relevant at the recovery stage.
(180) In theLandHamburg and in line with the reasoning mentioned in recitals (176) and (177), the recent legislative change (introduction of an equalization tax (see recital (26)) however ensures that, as from 1 January 2024, there is no advantage for the public casino operator. The Commission notes in that regard that the calculation of the amount of tax that would be due under the normal tax rules relies on the regular application of those normal tax rules, on the basis of commonly accepted and even sometimes conservative assumptions(110).
(181) The ECA submits that (i) a possible tax advantage would merely constitute compensation by the State for the provision of services of general economic interest (SGEI) by the German public casinos, and (ii) the public casinos operators have been entrusted by theLänderwith the public task of curbing illegal gambling and providing state-monitored opportunities to satisfy the irrepressible human need to gamble. The measures however do not meet several of the cumulative criteria laid down in theAltmarkcase-law(111)for the SGEI compensation not to confer an advantage.
(182) Firstly, Germany did not argue and there is no indication that public casinos operators have been entrusted with clearly defined public service obligations (within the meaning of theAltmarkcase law). Neither did Germany argue that public casinos operators provide services which, if they were considering their own commercial interest, they would not assume or would not assume to the same extent or under the same conditions. The Commission also notes in that regard that there are (or were at some point in the past) no public casinos operators (and thus no services at all) in certainLänder.
(183) Secondly, the parameters on the basis of which the compensation is calculated are not established in advance anda fortiorinot in an objective and transparent manner.
(184) Thirdly, in the absence of anex antedefinition of the compensation and in view of the design of the measures (absence of any link to the costs of the alleged public service obligations), it cannot be ensured that the compensation will not exceed what is necessary to cover all or part of the costs incurred in the discharge of public service obligations.
(185) Fourthly, there is no requirement(112)to select the operators at stake through a public procurement procedure which would allow for selection of the tenderer capable of providing those services at the least cost to the community. In addition, the level of compensation was also not determined on the basis of an analysis of the costs which a typical undertaking would have incurred.
(186) In conclusion, the measures do not fulfil the conditions of theAltmarkcase law under which an SGEI compensation does not confer an advantage. On the contrary, the measures are liable to provide an advantage (potential advantage by comparison to the normal tax rules), in particular given the absence of any claw-back mechanism.
(187) To the extent SBN argues that a private operator would also have granted tax advantages to keep the casinos alive in the view of the regulatory purpose to propose regulated access to risky games, this can be regarded as a reference to a possible market conformity of the advantage provided to public casinos operators. The objective brought forward by SBN – and which would have allegedly guided the action of a hypothetical private operator – is however precisely the kind of policy objective that only the State could pursue and that cannot be taken into account in the market economy operator test. Here the State acts as a public authority. The tax measures examined are obviously not comparable with decisions of investment of a private operator. The measures are thus not market conform.
(188) To be considered State aid, a measure must be selective, in the sense that it must favour only ‘certain undertakings’ or the production of ‘certain goods’. While at first sight the special tax rules in question are obviously and explicitly only benefitting public casinos operators and thus ‘certain undertakings’, the selectivity of a tax scheme should in principle be assessed in three steps(113): the first step (determination of the system of reference) was examined in Section 4.2.5.1; the second and third steps will be examined in the following recitals.
(189) Taking the normal tax rules as the reference system, it must be assessed, in a second step, if the measures derogate from the ‘normal’ tax rules inasmuch as they differentiate between economic operators that, in the light of the objective pursued by the normal tax regime, are in a comparable factual and legal situation. As described in more detail in Section 2.2.1, public casinos operators are exempted from certain taxes to which other undertakings are normally subject, namely corporate tax or income tax, trade tax and – to the extent that these other undertakings provide entertainment services – entertainment tax (where it exists). They are subject to a special tax regime(114)involving different taxes (with different names, bases and rates) laid down by eachLand. This special system is meant to replace the normal taxes from which public casinos operators are exempted (corporate tax/income tax and the related surcharges, trade tax and entertainment tax). It is thus in the light of the objective of those normal (otherwise applicable) taxes that the selectivity assessment should be carried out, this objective being in principle linked with (or reflected by) the triggering event of the tax or the tax base(115). Conversely, the objective of thespecialtaxes is not relevant at this stage of the selectivity reasoning(116): this is why the fact that the special taxes paid by public casinos operators would be intended to benefit charitable purposes or would have a regulatory objective has no bearing on the second step of the selectivity reasoning.
(190) In the light of the objective of corporate tax and income tax (and the related surcharges) and trade tax, namely to tax profit (recital (156)), all undertakings (including undertakings providing gambling services) are in a comparable situation, to the extent they make profit. In the light of that objective, the fact that public casinos operators would operate on the basis of legal monopolies is not relevant,inter aliabecause such monopolies were deemed by the German legislator to be very profitable (see recital (38)), so that taxing them is consistent with the objective of the general taxes on profit at stake. Similarly, the fact that public casinos operators would be subject to other special taxes (that may however lead to a possible advantage overall) or to specific regulatory rules regarding the prevention of addictive behaviours or the fact that the games offered in public casinos are different from the ones offered by the gambling halls is not relevant in the light of the objective of the general taxes on profit. Therefore, a possible advantage for the public casinos operators arising from the measures (including the exemption from corporate tax/income tax, from the related solidarity surcharge and from trade tax) isprima facieselective.
(191) Germany argues that the tax base of the solidarity surcharge is the amount of corporate and income tax, so that the public casinos operators would not pay any amount of solidarity surcharge even in the absence of an exemption from that solidarity surcharge. This reasoning is however based on the false premise that there would never be a positive amount of corporate tax or income tax under the normal tax rules. However, this only applies within the framework of the special tax rules where there is a corporate and income tax exemption, but it is not the case under the normal tax rules.
(192) As regards the entertainment tax, in the cities where it exists, the objective of that tax is to tax entertainment activities (in particular gambling machines, other gambling or playing for money). The municipal entertainment tax laws usually tax gambling machines (Spielautomat) or gambling devices (SpielgeräteorSpielapparaten) which are nowadays the main type of game offered in public casinos. This can be regarded as also covering table games offered in public casinos. Gambling more generally (and thus in particular table games) is sometimes taxed using a generic triggering event, e.g. playing for money (Ausspielen von Geld, Spielen um GeldorGeldausspielungen). More specifically, the objective is to tax entertainment on the basis of the money ‘spent’ or ‘played/gambled’ by the persons entertaining themselves (‘sich ein Vergnügen leistet’), as consistently highlighted by the case-law of the German courts(117)and in line with the name of the tax. This was not contested by Germany. In the light of this objective, the public casinos operators, to the extent they provide gambling activities (in particular gambling machines and table games), which constitute a type of ‘entertainment’ and ‘gambling’ for which players spend money to entertain themselves, are in a comparable situation compared to the gambling halls and the games they offer (or to other entertainment activities) that are subject to the tax. Accordingly, all those operators are, to the extent they offer entertainment (and in particular gambling) services, in a comparable situation in the light of the objective of the entertainment tax.
(193) To the extent the measures subject public casinos operators to special tax rules without differentiating between their gambling activities (table games and gambling machines) but merely by reference to their quality of public casinos operators, the subcategory of gambling activities carried out by these operators is not directly relevant to assess whether the schemes are selective. In the light of the objective of the entertainment tax, public casinos operators, to the extent they provide gambling activities (for instance gambling machines), are in the same situation as other operators subject to the entertainment tax such as the gambling halls which provide comparable gambling activities (gambling machines). The alleged fact that certain entertainment tax laws as they are drafted would not specifically cover table games is also irrelevant to the extent that the drafting of those laws directly stems from the existence of the special tax rules: table games are not specifically taxed in the entertainment tax lawsbecausepublic casinos are generally exempted from the entertainment tax from the outset while they are the only operators allowed to offer table games. CertainLänderclarified that it would be for the cities to determine whether table games would be taxed. By doing so, the cities would need to duly take into account the applicable principles of non-discrimination and equality of treatment. The normal tax rules by reference to which selectivity should be assessed must therefore, in this case, be processed to remove the effects of the measures, in particular the exemption from the entertainment tax. While it is acceptable that table games in public casinos would not be taxed under the entertainment tax in Bavaria (because there is no entertainment tax at all), table games in public casinos would necessarily be taxed inLänderwhere entertainment or at least some gambling is taxed (which is the case in allLänder– except Bavaria – to the extent the entertainment tax laws tax gambling machines). In any event, as evidenced by the fact that some public casinos (at a time where they offered mostly or only table games) used to be subject to the entertainment tax before being exempted, not subjecting table games to the entertainment tax would be selective by design and constitute a situation in which the boundaries of the system of reference have been designed in a clearly arbitrary or biased way(118). Taxing gambling machines in gambling halls without taxing table games which are at least as addictive would also constitute a discrimination in the light of the possible secondary objective of the entertainment tax (see recitals (196) to (199)).
(194) The fact (alleged by Germany) that games offered by public casinos are in general prohibited (unless a specific concession is granted to offer these games) while the games offered by gambling halls are normal economic activities simply subject to a licence is not relevant in the light of the objective of the entertainment tax. In addition, public casinos operators have and have had legal concessions to carry out their activities (and Germany does not contest that these games and concessions were legal). The reasoning that illegal games should not be taxed under the entertainment tax is thus not relevant. The argument by Germany that games offered by public casinos would not be in competition with the games offered by gambling halls, which the Commission contests in any event (see Section 4.2.3), is also not relevant in the light of the objective of the entertainment tax which encompasses many very different types of entertainment(119).
(195) Germany also argues that table games offered by public casinos are more work-intensive than the operation of gambling halls. This is however also not relevant in the light of the objective of the tax which is to tax the money ‘spent’ or ‘played/gambled’ by the persons entertaining themselves(120). Besides, public casinos in certain cities orLänderdo not offer table games and, in general, table games account for only a minor fraction of the public casinos’ turnover.
(196) The German authorities explained that the entertainment tax may also additionally pursue the objective (außerfiskalisches Lenkungsziel) of tackling addiction (namely to dis-incentivise gambling, which is seen as a risky or socially objectionable occupation)(121).
(197) Such a secondary and only possible objective cannot be taken into account in the selectivity assessment: some sorts of entertainment subject to the entertainment tax in many cities are not risky or socially objectionable occupations(122)so that this alleged secondary objective is not or at least not always relevant.In addition, this secondary objective simply reflects the fact that imposing any tax burden on an activity will, all other things being equal, make it less attractive (on the demand or on the supply side(123)). This objective thus stems directly from the main objective without being different from that main objective or requiring a different setup of the tax and thus a separate assessment is not required. Furthermore, the German courts explicitly stated that, even if the entertainment tax follows such an additional objective, this should not put into question the primary objective of the tax and its relationship to the money spent by the player in order to be entertained(124).
(198) In any event, in the light of this secondary objective, the games offered by the public casinos operators and thus also those operators themselves are in a comparable situation to the gambling halls (and the games they offer) because all these games are risky and addictive. While both types of games (the ones offered by public casinos and the ones offered by gambling halls) may have different risks and are also – for that very reason – subject to distinct regulatory frameworks (see Section 2.1), neither Germany nor the interested parties argue that these factual and legal differences, taken together, would make the games sufficiently different in the light of the objective of the entertainment tax. On the contrary, Germany argues that the stricter regulatory framework for public casinos operators reflects the higher addiction risk of the games they offer (and conversely the lower regulation of gambling halls reflects the lower risks that these games represent) and that public casinos fight against gambling addiction through their regulatory framework, not through taxation. This means that the factual differences between the games at stake (in terms of addictive potential) are already taken into account (compensated) by legal differences in their respective (non-fiscal) regulatory framework, so that they are ultimately in the same situation in the light of the (secondary) objective of the tax. There is also no indication that the specific regulatory framework applicable to public casinos completely removes the inherent risks of the games offered in public casinos, so that they should not be subject to the entertainment tax. This is also true for the games offered in commercial gambling halls: they are subject to the entertainment tax even though they are also subject to a specific regulatory framework to limit the risk they represent in terms of addiction, public health and players’ protection. For the purpose of the entertainment tax and in the light of the objectives of that tax, both types of games (and both types of operators) can thus be regarded as being in a comparable situation.
(199) More generally, the fact that public casinos operators (and all the games they offer) should be subject to entertainment tax, in the light of its objective, in the same way as gambling halls, is confirmed by the statements made by severalLänder(in reply to questions of the Commission),according to which public casinos operators would be subject to the entertainment tax if they were not legally exempted from that tax. The case-law of German courts also shows that the special taxes paid by public casinos operators replaces the normal taxes, including the entertainment tax(125), which would not make sense if public casinos (and their games) would not fall under the scope of that tax in the first place. In the same vein, the entertainment tax laws of the cities often explicitly exempt public casinos from entertainment tax, which also shows that the games offered by public casinos are regarded as falling, in principle, within the scope and under the objective of the entertainment tax. In addition, some public casinos operators used to pay the entertainment tax in the past (after such tax was introduced and before exemptions from entertainment tax were introduced)(126). Furthermore, still today, municipalities receive (as a transfer from theLänder) a fraction of the casino tax (levied on the GGI arising from all games offered in public casinos) to account for the loss of revenues arising from the exemption from entertainment tax (and trade tax)(127).
(200) As a conclusion, a possible advantage arising from the measures isprima facieselective.
(201) It is up to Germany to explain how theprima facieselective measures can be justified (and thus not selective) by reasons deriving directly from the intrinsic basic or guiding principles of the reference system or by being the result of inherent mechanisms necessary for the functioning and effectiveness of the system(128).
(202) Apart from arguing that no justification can be provided in cases where there is no common reference system (which Germany claims but the Commission contests), the German authorities merely stated that the constitutional principle of prevention of double and excessive taxation (Vermeidung einer doppelten und damit übermäßigen Besteuerung) should be taken into account(129). That objective may be regarded as a guiding principle of the German tax system: it is supported by the case-law of the German constitutional tribunal which refers to the principle of proportionality(130).
(203) However, by merely mentioning the constitutional principle of prevention of double and excessive taxation, Germany did not explain how the (possibly unlimited) advantage provided by the measures could be regarded as justified by that principle, let alone be proportionate(131). In addition, Germany’s reasoning can only aim at justifying a lower tax burden for public casinos operators under the special tax rulesbecausetaxation under thenormaltax rules (the only reference for the identification of an advantage for State aid purposes) would allegedly be excessive. Germany however does not explain why and how this would be the case. The idea that taxation under the normal tax rules would be excessive also directly contradicts the assumption originally made by the German legislator that taxation under normal tax rules was insufficient (leading to a too low tax burden) to cream off the unusually high profit of public casinos operators.
(204) Furthermore, to the extent Germany would aim at justifying ad hoc reductions of special taxes for public casinos operatorsbecausetaxation under thespecialtax rules would be excessive (so that ad hoc reductions would be necessary), this is not the subject of this Decision which focuses on the difference of taxation in comparison to thenormaltax rules: the ad hoc reductions of the special taxes are part of the special tax rules and thus part of the measures to be assessed by comparison with the normal tax rules. Germany also does not adduce evidence showing that the tax burden of public casinos operators (under the special tax rules) was regarded as excessive. In the only case (known to the Commission) where the public casinos operators’ taxation was examined from the point of view of excessive taxation by German courts, the German court ruled that the tax system of public casinos operators in theLandin question was not as such the cause of the alleged excessive taxation of the operator at stake, even though the operator was forced to terminate its activities(132).
(205) In any case, the design of the measures (special taxes replacing the normal taxes from which public casinos are exempted), which does not refer to the level of taxation under the normal tax rules or to any possible proxy for excessive taxation(133), does not ensure that such a justification would be achieved in a proportionate manner.
(206) Certain operators such as SBN, and to some extent the German federal authorities, submit that the special tax system applicable to public casinos operators primarily pursues regulatory purposes (allow the public casinos operators to carry out their public task) which would constitute a justification by the logic of the tax system. Such alleged objectives are contradicted by the facts(134), by the design of the special tax rules(135)and by the case-law(136). They are external to the tax systems in question (corporate tax and income tax, trade tax, entertainment tax) and cannot constitute a justification by the guiding (internal) principles of the normal tax rules. They were not consistently applied in practice(137). In addition, the design of the measures, which does not refer to any objective proxy related to safeguarding the economic viability of public casinos operators in the light of their public tasks, does not ensure that such an alleged justification would be achieved in a proportionate and adequate manner.
(207) In view of the above, the measures involve a selective advantage to the public casinos operators, except – as from 1 January 2024 – in theLandHamburg.
(208) According to Article 1, point (b)(i), of Council Regulation (EU) 2015/1589(138), an aid measure is ‘existing if it‘existed prior to the entry into force of the TFEU in the respective Member States’; this concerns‘aid schemes and individual aid which were put into effect before, and are still applicable after, the entry into force of the TFEU in the respective Member States’. The TFEU(139)entered into force in Germany on 1 January 1958 (for the Western GermanLänder) and 3 October 1990 (for the East GermanLänder).
(209) According to Article 1, point (c), of the Regulation (EU) 2015/1589the concept of ‘new aid’ includes ‘alterations to existing aid’. Such alterations must be material, not simply of a formal nature, to qualify as new aid: an alteration cannot be characterised as being of a purely formal or administrative nature if it is ‘liable to affect the evaluation of the compatibility of the aid measure with the common market’(140). In that framework (see Article 4 of Commission Regulation (EC) No 794/2004(141)) also a change reducing the aid intensity or the scope of the existing aid constitutes an alteration(142). In addition, if the alteration affects the actual substance of the original scheme (substantial alteration), the alteration affects the existing aid nature of the scheme itself. However, where the alteration is ‘clearly severable’ from the initial scheme(143), only the severable element of the scheme that was modified qualifies as new aid.
(210) It is thus necessary to examine whether the measures were put into effect before the entry into force of the TFEU (Section 4.3.1) and if so, whether such ‘existing’ measures were altered after the entry into force of the TFEU (Section 4.3.2). In all cases (i.e. for allLänder), this analysis shows that the special tax treatment of public casinos operators (as it existed during the recovery period(144)) did not exist before the entry into force of the TFEU, so that the aid at stake is not existing aid. In particular, Section 4.3.1 shows that, in someLänder, no measure was put into effect before the entry into force of the TFEU. Section 4.3.2.1 demonstrates that in some other Länder, the measures that were put into effect before the entry into force of the TFEU were not the basis for the special tax treatment of the operators during the recovery period. Furthermore and as an additional line of reasoning, even if some measures existed and were put into effect before the entry into force of the TFEU, they were materially and substantially modified after the entry into force of the TFEU and before the beginning of the recovery period,as will be demonstrated in Sections 4.3.2.2.2 and 4.3.2.2.3 (reduction of the casino tax rate) and Section 4.3.2.3 (introduction of a new normal tax).
(211) In the East GermanLänder(including East Berlin), public casinos operators were generally (any operator, for any casino, without limit in time) subject to special taxes (a casino tax of 85 %) and exempted from income tax, corporate tax(145), trade tax and entertainment tax on the basis of two laws adopted before 3 October 1990(146). There was thus in theseLändera scheme (a fully fledged scheme, without a need for implementing or complementing measures) in place before the entry into force of the TFEU.
(212) In two East GermanLänder(East Berlin and Saxony), fully fledged special taxes existed and were actually ‘put into effect’ before the entry into force of the TFEU because public casinos had opened and were subject to the existing special tax rules already before the entry into force of the TFEU(147).
(213) In the other East GermanLänder, even though fully fledged special tax schemes existed before the entry into force of the TFEU, they were not actually ‘put into effect’ because no public casinos existed at that time(148). It follows from the actual wording of Article 1, point (b)(i), of Regulation (EU) 2015/1589, in particular the use of the term ‘put into effect’, that existing aid, for the purposes of that provision, does not mean aid or an aid scheme which was created before the entry into force of the TFEU in the respective Member State, but which was implemented in that State only after that date(149).
(214) The schemes existing in these other East GermanLänder(Brandenburg, Mecklenburg-Vorpommern, Saxony-Anhalt and Thuringia) before the entry into force of the TFEU thus cannot be regarded as existing measures and the aid they provide is necessarily new aid. Only the schemes put into effect in East Berlin and Saxony can be regarded as existing before the entry into force of the TFEU.
(215) Unless the schemes in East Berlin and Saxony were altered after the entry into force of the TFEU, those two schemes would be existing aid measures. It is thus necessary to examine whether and to which extent these measures were materially and substantially altered after the entry into force of the TFEU. This will be examined in Section 4.3.2.2.
(216) It is true that thegeneral principlesgoverning the taxation of public casinos operators (application of a special tax system aiming at skimming their profits) have been laid down well before the entry into force of the TFEU (in the 1933 law and in the 1938 law). However, these laws are too vague (lex imperfecta, according to the German courts(150)) and cannot be regarded as laying down a State aid measure. Contrary to what Germany argues, the 1938 law cannot be regarded as exempting public casinos operators fromLändertaxes and municipal taxes. Article 6(2) of that law was too imprecise to be (and was never) directly applied: it merely laid down a possibility for the competent authorities (Ermächtigung(151)) to lay down, in the future, exemptions fromLändertaxes and municipal taxes, which calls for further ‘implementing measures’ so that the 1933 and 1938 laws cannot be regarded as laying down a State aid measure. The fact that some public casinos operators, after 1938, paid entertainment tax or trade tax(152)confirms that the 1938 law did not exempt them from those taxes. In the same vein, the 1938 law did not introduce a sufficiently precise system of special taxes (the casino tax was mentioned but its main features, especially the tax rate, were not defined and it thus called for implementing measures). Furthermore, arguing (as Germany does) that the 1933 and 1938 laws are sufficiently precise to be regarded today as a (unique) existing scheme contradicts the current situation in which eachLanddefines its own specific tax scheme for public casinos operators (a situation where the tax rules applying to public casinos operators are sometimes very different depending on theLänderand where each set of special tax rules rather constitutes a scheme on its own). The insufficiently precise provisions of the 1933 and 1938 laws are thus irrelevant for the qualification as new or existing aid.
(217) Furthermore, as explained in Section 4.1, the schemes of theLänderare complex measures comprising two inseparable aspects (special taxes and exemptions from normal taxes). From that perspective, a separate or autonomous assessment of each of the (intrinsically linked) aspects of those measures would not take into account the specific nature of the measures. For that reason, the assessment must focus on the measures to the extent they exist, that is as fully fledged measures, and not on the separate sub-measures which do not logically exist autonomously. Consequently, if some aspects of the schemes (for instance the special taxes) were not laid down before the entry into force of the TFEU, the schemes at stake cannot be existing aid as they did not even exist as measures: the mere fact that some of the tax exemptions such as the corporate tax and income tax exemption may have been laid down before the entry into force of the TFEU cannot be relevant as these earlier measures were missing complementing and implementing measures(153).
(218) This is for example the case in all theLänderwhich first introduced the exemptions from local taxes and the special taxes in the 1970s and which had no public casinos before: there was no (fully fledged) ‘measure’ and, in addition, no special tax treatment could be ‘put into effect’ (as there was no public casino) before the entry into force of the TFEU in West Berlin, Bremen, Hamburg, Lower Saxony, North Rhine-Westphalia and Saarland (see Section 4.3.2.1.1 on the situation in theseLänderafter the entry into force of the TFEU).
(219) In the other West GermanLänder(Baden-Württemberg, Bavaria, Hesse, Rhineland-Palatinate, Schleswig-Holstein), there were some existing (fully fledged) measures put into effect before the entry into force of the TFEU but they did not concern all public casinos operators generally, for any casino, and were limited in time. They concerned only the operators existing at the time, only for a limited period of time and only for the operation of specific casinos (see the detailed assessment in Section 4.3.2.1.2).
(220) In the cases mentioned in recital (218) where there were no (fully fledged) ‘measures’ before the entry into force of the TFEU, there cannot be ‘existing’ measures and the special tax treatment necessarily constitutes new aid (in its entirety). As regards the cases mentioned in recital (219) where fully fledged measures existed but were not generally applicable, it still needs to be examined whether they constitute the basis for the special tax treatment of public casinos during the recovery period(154)(Section 4.3.2.1.2) and (as an additional reasoning) whether these measures underwent alterations after the entry into force of the TFEU (see Section 4.3.2.2).
(221) The provisions laying down the special tax treatment of public casinos operators underwent a series of changes after the entry into force of the TFEU, both before and after the beginning of the recovery period. In situations described in recitals (218) and (219), measures that lay down the special tax treatment of public casinos during the recovery period did not exist before the entry into force of the TFEU. Some of the changes after the entry into force of the TFEU (introduction of the special tax and of the exemption from municipal taxes) thus lead to the very creation of the measures (which makes them new aid in their entirety). In other situations (and also as an alternative reasoning for the situations described in recitals (218) and (219)), the changes that happened after the entry into force of the TFEU will be assessed as to whether they constitute material and substantial alterations.
(222) Thegenerally(155)applicableexemptions fromLändertaxes and municipal taxes (which in effect encompasses trade tax and entertainment tax) and the special taxes on public casinos operators (casino tax in particular) constitute the main features of the tax schemes applicable to public casinos operators. In all West GermanLänder, the measures laying down the special tax treatment of public casinos during the recovery period were introduced by laws adopted after the entry into force of the TFEU and before the beginning of the recovery period, as explained in the two sub-sections below. As public casinos are, since the beginning of the recovery period, subject to special tax treatment on the basis of measures adopted after the entry into force of the TFEU, the aid they received is prima facie new aid.
(223) In six West GermanLänder(West Berlin, Bremen, Hamburg, Lower Saxony, North Rhine-Westphalia and Saarland), there was no special tax on public casinos (casino tax) and no exemption fromLändertaxes and municipal taxes predating the entry into force of the TFEU (because there were no public casinos in theseLänderbefore that date). The generally applicable exemption fromLändertaxes and municipal taxes and the special taxes were introduced in the laws of theLänderafter 1958 and before the beginning of the recovery period, as illustrated in Table 1 below.Table 1First provision laying down the exemption fromLändertaxes and municipal taxes and the main features of the casino taxBerlin (West Berlin in 1973)Law of 13.4.1973(156)BremenLaw of 20.2.1978(157)HamburgLaw of 24.5.1976(158)Lower SaxonyLaw of 25.7.1973(159)North Rhine-WestphaliaLaw of 19.3.1974(160)SaarlandLicence (Spielbankerlaubnis) of 22.10.1976 (for the first public casino). Law of 9.7.2003 (generally applicable)(161) Berlin (West Berlin in 1973) Law of 13.4.1973(156) Bremen Law of 20.2.1978(157) Hamburg Law of 24.5.1976(158) Lower Saxony Law of 25.7.1973(159) North Rhine-Westphalia Law of 19.3.1974(160) Saarland Licence (Spielbankerlaubnis) of 22.10.1976 (for the first public casino). Law of 9.7.2003 (generally applicable)(161)
Berlin (West Berlin in 1973) Law of 13.4.1973(156)
Bremen Law of 20.2.1978(157)
Hamburg Law of 24.5.1976(158)
Lower Saxony Law of 25.7.1973(159)
North Rhine-Westphalia Law of 19.3.1974(160)
Saarland Licence (Spielbankerlaubnis) of 22.10.1976 (for the first public casino). Law of 9.7.2003 (generally applicable)(161)
Berlin (West Berlin in 1973) Law of 13.4.1973(156)
Bremen Law of 20.2.1978(157)
Hamburg Law of 24.5.1976(158)
Lower Saxony Law of 25.7.1973(159)
North Rhine-Westphalia Law of 19.3.1974(160)
Saarland Licence (Spielbankerlaubnis) of 22.10.1976 (for the first public casino). Law of 9.7.2003 (generally applicable)(161)
(224) Before the adoption of these laws of theLänder, there were no fully fledged (let alone put into effect) schemes in the six West GermanLänderat stake. There were thus no existing schemes before the entry into force of the TFEU, so that the aid schemes at stake today cannot be regarded as existing aid and the aid they provide is necessarily (in its entirety) new aid (see also Section 4.3.1.2).
(225) As an alternative reasoning, if one considers that the different parts of each special tax scheme should be assessed separately (contrary to the main line of reasoning set out in recitals (216) and (217), which relies on the idea that the schemes do not exist as long as all their complementary features – special taxes and tax exemptions – are not precisely laid down), the adoption after the entry into force of the TFEU of laws of theLänderlaying down an exemption for public casinos operators fromLändertaxes and municipal taxes and introducing special taxes would in any event constitute a material and substantial alteration to the ‘existing’ tax regimes of public casinos operators (which would merely consist in the existing corporate tax and income tax exemption). The measure indeed transformed from a pure (non-functional) corporate and income tax exemption to a much more complex measure in which the newly introduced special taxes were meant to replace normal taxes from which the operators were exempted (not only corporate and income tax). Therefore, in the six West GermanLänderconcerned, this alteration would in any event transform the potentially existing measures into new aid schemes and the entirety of the advantage arising from the schemes would, as from the alteration (which predates the beginning of the recovery period), constitute new aid.
(226) In the five remaining Western German Länder (Baden-Württemberg, Bavaria, Hesse, Rhineland-Palatinate, Schleswig-Holstein), according to the German authorities, the public casinos operators that have been active during the recovery period are exempted from Länder taxes and municipal taxes and subject to special taxes on the basis of laws of the Länder adopted after the entry into force of the TFEU (and before the beginning of the recovery period), as illustrated in Table 2.Table 2First provision laying down, in a general manner, the exemption fromLändertaxes and municipal taxes and the main features of the special taxes in five Western GermanLänderBaden-WürttembergLaw of 23.2.1995BavariaLaw of 26.7.1995HesseLaw of 21.12.1988Rhineland-PalatinateLaw of 19.11.1985Schleswig-HolsteinOrdinance (Verordnung) of 13.12.1994. Law of 29.12.1995 Baden-Württemberg Law of 23.2.1995 Bavaria Law of 26.7.1995 Hesse Law of 21.12.1988 Rhineland-Palatinate Law of 19.11.1985 Schleswig-Holstein Ordinance (Verordnung) of 13.12.1994. Law of 29.12.1995
Baden-Württemberg Law of 23.2.1995
Bavaria Law of 26.7.1995
Hesse Law of 21.12.1988
Rhineland-Palatinate Law of 19.11.1985
Schleswig-Holstein Ordinance (Verordnung) of 13.12.1994. Law of 29.12.1995
Baden-Württemberg Law of 23.2.1995
Bavaria Law of 26.7.1995
Hesse Law of 21.12.1988
Rhineland-Palatinate Law of 19.11.1985
Schleswig-Holstein Ordinance (Verordnung) of 13.12.1994. Law of 29.12.1995
(227) However, there had already been public casinos and public casinos operators in these fiveLänderbefore the new provisions listed in Table 2 were adopted and before the entry into force of the TFEU. Those operators were already subject to special tax rules before the entry into force of the TFEU and those tax rules were thus existing measures at that time (1958). If the measures listed in table 2 constituted a mere continuation of the previously existing measures put into effect before the entry into force of the TFEU, they could be regarded as existing measures as the adoption of those measures would be regarded as a mere formal or administrative change, not an alteration. This is, however, not the case. As will be demonstrated below (recitals (228) to (236)), the new laws of theLänderintroducing the generally applicable exemptions from municipal andLändertaxes and laying down the special taxes for public casinos operators (Table 2) were not alterations of purely formal nature; they did not simply replaceequivalent‘existing’ provisions applicable to the existing operators.
(228) Firstly, these legal provisions replaced provisions laid down in contracts or ministerial decisions. Because taxes are usually a competence of the legislator, as is clear from the laws adopted in the 1970s, the corresponding earlier contracts or ministerial decisions enjoyed only a lower level of legal certainty. This change (increase) of the provisions’ level of legal certainty necessarily affects the substance of the previous measures and thus constitutes a material and non-severable alteration giving rise to new aid (for the entirety of the aid).
(229) Secondly, the measures existing before the entry into force of the TFEU had a different (temporal, personal and material) scope compared to the measures listed in Table 2 and cannot thus be regarded as the cause or origin of the special tax treatment of public casinos operators in these fiveLänderduring the recovery period, as explained in recitals (230) to (235). This means that, if the new measures listed in Table 2 had not been adopted, there would be no legal basis for the special tax treatment of the public casinos operators during the recovery period.
(230) In most cases (Bavaria(162), Hesse, Rhineland-Palatinate for the public casino in Bad Dürkheim(163)and Schleswig-Holstein), Germany tried to allege that the exemption from entertainment tax existed before the entry into force of the TFEU, but it admitted that it was unable to retrieve the legal provisions (allegedly) exempting the existing public casinos operators from trade tax and entertainment tax and laying down the special taxes before the entry into force of the TFEU. There is no indication that the special tax rules (tax exemptions and special taxes) allegedly applicable before the entry into force of the TFEU were applicable (i) without time limit (or with an expiry date postdating the beginning of the recovery period), (ii) to any operator(164)(iii) for the operation of any casino and (iv) were laid down by law (legal certainty). There is thus no indication that the measures as they exist today (generally applicable to any operator and any casino without limit in time and laid down by law) are simply a continuation of measures existing before the entry into force of the TFEU. The evidence (actual provisions laying down the special tax treatment before the entry into force of the TFEU) existing in other cases (see recital (231)), rather shows that the special tax treatment of public casinos operators was (before the entry into force of the TFEU) laid down in concession contracts or ministerial decisions, mostly with a limited duration and covering onlyintuitu personaethe specific concessionaire for a specific casino. The expiration of such measures after the entry into force of the TFEU and before the beginning of the recovery period is sufficient to conclude that, even in cases where fully fledged measures were put into effect (with their narrow material and time scope) before the entry into force of the TFEU, the provisions applicable for the whole recovery period are new measures (not the continuation of existing measures). There is thus no indication that the measures (generally applicable special taxes and exemptions from municipal andLändertaxes) were existing measures. They rather constitute newly created measures or alternatively, at the very least, material alterations to the previously existing measures, because they extended the material, personal and temporal scope of those previous measures and increased the level of legal certainty. As those measures were adopted before the beginning of the recovery period (see Table 2), any aid arising during the recovery period constitutes new aid in its entirety.
(231) In the remaining cases, the Commission assessed the legal basis laying down a special tax treatment at the time of entry into force of the TFEU.
(232) In Baden-Württemberg, the special tax rules (tax exemptions and special taxes) that existed before the entry into force of the TFEU were laid down only individually in ministerial decisions for one identified operator which ceased operating public casinos before the beginning of the recovery period(165). In addition, the special tax treatment for the casino in Konstanz was limited in time and expired in 1960(166), before the beginning of the recovery period. As a consequence, the tax treatment of the public casinos operator(s) in Baden-Württemberg during the recovery period is a new measure and arises at the earliest from the 1995 law mentioned in Table 2.
(233) As regards the public casino in Bad Neuenahr (Rhineland-Palatinate), the special tax treatment existing before the entry into force of the TFEU for its operator was laid down only for a limited duration which expired long before the beginning of the recovery period(167). That measure thus cannot be the origin of the special tax treatment of the current operator of that public casino which rather arises at the earliest from the 1985 law mentioned in Table 2.
(234) In those cases, it is thus clear that the special tax treatment of public casinos operators during the recovery period originated from provisions adopted after the entry into force of the TFEU which did not constitute a mere continuation of measures put into effect before the entry into force of the TFEU. Even if it is true that Spielbank Baden-Baden GmbH & Co. KG and the operator in Bad Neuenahr were the only public casinos operators before 1958 in Baden-Württemberg and Rhineland-Palatinate respectively and that, as a consequence, (i) all operators were exempted from the normal taxes at that time and (ii) it was not necessary to lay down a generally applicable tax exemption, this does not change the fact that the only provisions existing before 1958 exempted, on the basis of mere ministerial decisions or contracts, only those specific operators (and for a limited time and only for the operation of certain casinos) and were not equivalent to a general exemption that could apply without limitation in time to other operators for any public casino, in particular all the operators active during the recovery period. In addition, even if, as argued by theLandRhineland-Palatinate, the time-limited special tax treatment was regularly prolonged/renewed, each renewal (after the entry into force of the TFEU) constitutes a material alteration (of the time-limited duration) giving rise to a new measure. As a consequence, in those cases as well, any aid granted during the recovery period constitutes new aid in its entirety.
(235) These findings are summarised in Table 3.Table 3Special tax treatments existing before the entry into force of the TFEU and their evolution (in five Western GermanLänderwhere certain public casinos existed before the entry into force of the TFEU)Baden-WürttembergExisting measures laid down in 1955 (in a ministerial decision) for one specific operator (Spielbank Baden-Baden GmbH & Co KG) and one casino (in Baden-Baden) without limit in time. Those measures were repealed in 1995.For the other existing casino (in Konstanz), that same operator was subject to a special tax treatment following a 1951 ministerial act which linked the tax treatment to the licence which expired in 1960.The operator of both casinos stopped operations in 2003.BavariaNo legal provision before the entry into force of the TFEU (no indication that the existing measure would cover the public casinos operator(s) active during the recovery period and for all the casinos).HesseNo legal provision before the entry into force of the TFEU (no indication that the existing measure would cover the public casinos operator(s) active during the recovery period and for all the casinos).Rhineland-Palatinate- No legal provision before the entry into force of the TFEU for the (operator of the) public casino in Bad Dürkheim(no indication that the existing measure would cover the public casinos operator(s) active during the recovery period and for all the casinos).- Existing special tax treatment (in a contract) for the (operator of the) public casino in Bad Neuenahr expired in 1962.Schleswig-HolsteinNo legal provision before the entry into force of the TFEU (no indication that the existing measure would cover the public casinos operator(s) active during the recovery period and for all the casinos). Baden-Württemberg Existing measures laid down in 1955 (in a ministerial decision) for one specific operator (Spielbank Baden-Baden GmbH & Co KG) and one casino (in Baden-Baden) without limit in time. Those measures were repealed in 1995.For the other existing casino (in Konstanz), that same operator was subject to a special tax treatment following a 1951 ministerial act which linked the tax treatment to the licence which expired in 1960.The operator of both casinos stopped operations in 2003. Bavaria No legal provision before the entry into force of the TFEU (no indication that the existing measure would cover the public casinos operator(s) active during the recovery period and for all the casinos). Hesse No legal provision before the entry into force of the TFEU (no indication that the existing measure would cover the public casinos operator(s) active during the recovery period and for all the casinos). Rhineland-Palatinate – No legal provision before the entry into force of the TFEU for the (operator of the) public casino in Bad Dürkheim(no indication that the existing measure would cover the public casinos operator(s) active during the recovery period and for all the casinos).- Existing special tax treatment (in a contract) for the (operator of the) public casino in Bad Neuenahr expired in 1962. Schleswig-Holstein No legal provision before the entry into force of the TFEU (no indication that the existing measure would cover the public casinos operator(s) active during the recovery period and for all the casinos).
Baden-Württemberg Existing measures laid down in 1955 (in a ministerial decision) for one specific operator (Spielbank Baden-Baden GmbH & Co KG) and one casino (in Baden-Baden) without limit in time. Those measures were repealed in 1995.For the other existing casino (in Konstanz), that same operator was subject to a special tax treatment following a 1951 ministerial act which linked the tax treatment to the licence which expired in 1960.The operator of both casinos stopped operations in 2003.
Bavaria No legal provision before the entry into force of the TFEU (no indication that the existing measure would cover the public casinos operator(s) active during the recovery period and for all the casinos).
Hesse No legal provision before the entry into force of the TFEU (no indication that the existing measure would cover the public casinos operator(s) active during the recovery period and for all the casinos).
Rhineland-Palatinate – No legal provision before the entry into force of the TFEU for the (operator of the) public casino in Bad Dürkheim(no indication that the existing measure would cover the public casinos operator(s) active during the recovery period and for all the casinos).- Existing special tax treatment (in a contract) for the (operator of the) public casino in Bad Neuenahr expired in 1962.
Schleswig-Holstein No legal provision before the entry into force of the TFEU (no indication that the existing measure would cover the public casinos operator(s) active during the recovery period and for all the casinos).
Baden-Württemberg Existing measures laid down in 1955 (in a ministerial decision) for one specific operator (Spielbank Baden-Baden GmbH & Co KG) and one casino (in Baden-Baden) without limit in time. Those measures were repealed in 1995.For the other existing casino (in Konstanz), that same operator was subject to a special tax treatment following a 1951 ministerial act which linked the tax treatment to the licence which expired in 1960.The operator of both casinos stopped operations in 2003.
Bavaria No legal provision before the entry into force of the TFEU (no indication that the existing measure would cover the public casinos operator(s) active during the recovery period and for all the casinos).
Hesse No legal provision before the entry into force of the TFEU (no indication that the existing measure would cover the public casinos operator(s) active during the recovery period and for all the casinos).
Rhineland-Palatinate – No legal provision before the entry into force of the TFEU for the (operator of the) public casino in Bad Dürkheim(no indication that the existing measure would cover the public casinos operator(s) active during the recovery period and for all the casinos).- Existing special tax treatment (in a contract) for the (operator of the) public casino in Bad Neuenahr expired in 1962.
Schleswig-Holstein No legal provision before the entry into force of the TFEU (no indication that the existing measure would cover the public casinos operator(s) active during the recovery period and for all the casinos).
(236) In conclusion, even if the special tax measures applicable to the existing public casinos operators in those five West GermanLänder(Baden-Württemberg, Bavaria, Hesse, Rhineland-Palatinate, Schleswig-Holstein) at the time of entry into force of the TFEU may have been existing measures at that time (1958), there was no continuity of those measures up to the special tax rules laid down in the laws on public casinos of the sameLänder, which are, since before the recovery period, the basis of the special tax treatment applicable to the operators and public casinos concerned by the recovery period. The special tax rules laid down in the laws of theLänderon public casinos (which are the basis of the special tax treatment of public casinos operators during the recovery period) thus cannot be regarded as predating entry into force of the TFEU and are new measures since before the beginning of the recovery period. The aid they have provided during the recovery period is necessarily (and in its entirety) new aid. As an alternative reasoning, even if the new measure (covering the operators active during the recovery period) were regarded as an alteration of a pre-existing measure (by extending its personal, material and temporal scope), the Commission considers that all the aid awarded during the recovery period would precisely arise from that alteration (as the pre-existing measure did not cover the operators active during the recovery period) and would thus also constitute new aid.
(237) A modification (a reduction but also an increase(168)) of the tax burden under the special tax rules (for instance via a change of the casino tax rate) constitutes an alteration if it is liable to affect the compatibility of the measures. A change of the special tax rules affects the amount of the advantage(169)and the amount of the advantage is a core feature of the compatibility assessment of the measures: it affects in particular the proportionality (see Section 4.4), the incentive effect and the appropriateness of the aid(170).
(238) The introduction of the VAT offsetting mechanism did not materially modify the ‘existing’ measures, if any (see recital (119) of this Decision and Section 3.3.2.1.1. of the opening decision).
(239) The casino tax and other special taxes paid by public casinos operators constitute one of the main features of the tax schemes applicable to public casinos operators. In allLänder, the rates of these taxes were however materially and substantially modified (reduced and, in rare cases, increased)(171)and, in mostLänder, also the structure of the tax was materially and substantially modified (introduction of progressivity, introduction of an additional tax on profit while the special taxes were previously levied on the GGI), as illustrated in Table 4.Table 4Reduction (or increase) of the casino tax rate (including other taxes on the GGI) and change of the overall tax structureBaden-WürttembergLaw of 20.11.2012 (applicable as from 2010) (45-50 % + tax on profit, instead of 80 %)BavariaLaw of 29.4.1999 (50-70 %, instead of 80 %)Law of 24.4.2001 (50-70 % – higher thresholds)Law of 9.5.2006 (50-60 %)Law of 14.4.2009 (35-40 %)Law of 14.4.2011 (30-35 %)Law of 24.5.2019 (25-30 %)BerlinLaw of 8.2.1999 (80-91 %, instead of 85 % in East Berlin and 80 % in West Berlin)Law of 3.3.2010 (applicable as form 1.1.2010) (40-50 % + tax on profit)BrandenburgLaw of 22.4.2003 (60-80 %, instead of 85 %)Law of 18.12.2007 (55-75 %)Law of 28.6.2012 (25-45 %)BremenLaw of 18.12.2012 (applicable as from 1.1.2013) (40 %, instead of 80 %)HamburgLaw of 16.11.1999 (70-90 %, instead of 80 %-90 %)Law of 23.5.2014 (55-80 % + tax on profit up to 10 % of the GGI)HesseLaw of 13.12.2017 (75 % + weitere Leistungen, instead of 80 % + weitere Leistungen)Mecklenburg-VorpommernLaw of 7.5.1996 (70-85 %, instead of 85 %)Law of 5.7.2004 (50-80 % + tax on profit)Law of 17.12.2009 (applicable as from 1.1.2007) (25-80 % + tax on profit)Lower SaxonyLaw of 25.6.2003 (applicable as from 1.9.2002) (80 %, instead of 70-88 %).Law of 16.12.2004 (applicable as form 1.1.2005) (50-70 %).Law of 27.8.2009 (applicable as from 1.1.2009) (0-75 % + tax on profit)NRWLaw of 30.10.2007 (applicable as from 1.1.2008) (15-75 % + tax on profit, instead of 80 %)Law of 13.11.2012 (applicable as from 1.1.2012) (45-55 % + tax on profit)Rhineland-PalatinateLaw of 22.12.2015 (40-90 % + tax on profit, instead of 80 %)SaarlandLaw of 9.7.2003 (62-72 %, instead of 80 %).Law of 5.5.2010 (52-62 %).Law of 4.12.2013 (applicable as from 1.2.2014) (39-49 % + tax on profit).SaxonyLaw of 9.12.1993 (80 %, instead of 85 %)Law of 11.12.2002 (50-70 %)Law of 26.6.2009 (applicable as from 1.1.2007) (40-60 %)Law of 14.6.2012 (35-55 %)Saxony-AnhaltLaw of 26.6.1991 (80-92 %, instead of 85 %)Law of 30.7.1997 (50-80 %)Law of 30.8.2004 (70 %)Law of 16.12.2009 (25-50 % + tax on profit)Schleswig-HolsteinFinanzvertragfor the casino in Lübeck-Travemünde 1959 (80 %), 1964 (83 %), 1971 (85 %), 1972 (85.5 %).Finanzvertragfor the casino in Westerland 1949 (80 %), 1966 (71-80 %), 1972 (72-82 %)Law of 8.7.1976 (73-98-88 %)Law of 14.6.1982 (73-88 %)Law of 29.12.1995 (80 %)Law of 8.10.2010 (40-55 % + tax on profit)Law of 25.4.2012 (30-55 %, depending on the games)ThuringiaLaw of 10.5.1994 (80 %, instead of 85 %)Law of 27.11.1997 (45-80 %)Law of 29.3.2011 (25-60 % + tax on profit) Baden-Württemberg Law of 20.11.2012 (applicable as from 2010) (45-50 % + tax on profit, instead of 80 %) Bavaria Law of 29.4.1999 (50-70 %, instead of 80 %)Law of 24.4.2001 (50-70 % – higher thresholds)Law of 9.5.2006 (50-60 %)Law of 14.4.2009 (35-40 %)Law of 14.4.2011 (30-35 %)Law of 24.5.2019 (25-30 %) Berlin Law of 8.2.1999 (80-91 %, instead of 85 % in East Berlin and 80 % in West Berlin)Law of 3.3.2010 (applicable as form 1.1.2010) (40-50 % + tax on profit) Brandenburg Law of 22.4.2003 (60-80 %, instead of 85 %)Law of 18.12.2007 (55-75 %)Law of 28.6.2012 (25-45 %) Bremen Law of 18.12.2012 (applicable as from 1.1.2013) (40 %, instead of 80 %) Hamburg Law of 16.11.1999 (70-90 %, instead of 80 %-90 %)Law of 23.5.2014 (55-80 % + tax on profit up to 10 % of the GGI) Hesse Law of 13.12.2017 (75 % + weitere Leistungen, instead of 80 % + weitere Leistungen) Mecklenburg-Vorpommern Law of 7.5.1996 (70-85 %, instead of 85 %)Law of 5.7.2004 (50-80 % + tax on profit)Law of 17.12.2009 (applicable as from 1.1.2007) (25-80 % + tax on profit) Lower Saxony Law of 25.6.2003 (applicable as from 1.9.2002) (80 %, instead of 70-88 %).Law of 16.12.2004 (applicable as form 1.1.2005) (50-70 %).Law of 27.8.2009 (applicable as from 1.1.2009) (0-75 % + tax on profit) NRW Law of 30.10.2007 (applicable as from 1.1.2008) (15-75 % + tax on profit, instead of 80 %)Law of 13.11.2012 (applicable as from 1.1.2012) (45-55 % + tax on profit) Rhineland-Palatinate Law of 22.12.2015 (40-90 % + tax on profit, instead of 80 %) Saarland Law of 9.7.2003 (62-72 %, instead of 80 %).Law of 5.5.2010 (52-62 %).Law of 4.12.2013 (applicable as from 1.2.2014) (39-49 % + tax on profit). Saxony Law of 9.12.1993 (80 %, instead of 85 %)Law of 11.12.2002 (50-70 %)Law of 26.6.2009 (applicable as from 1.1.2007) (40-60 %)Law of 14.6.2012 (35-55 %) Saxony-Anhalt Law of 26.6.1991 (80-92 %, instead of 85 %)Law of 30.7.1997 (50-80 %)Law of 30.8.2004 (70 %)Law of 16.12.2009 (25-50 % + tax on profit) Schleswig-Holstein Finanzvertragfor the casino in Lübeck-Travemünde 1959 (80 %), 1964 (83 %), 1971 (85 %), 1972 (85.5 %).Finanzvertragfor the casino in Westerland 1949 (80 %), 1966 (71-80 %), 1972 (72-82 %)Law of 8.7.1976 (73-98-88 %)Law of 14.6.1982 (73-88 %)Law of 29.12.1995 (80 %)Law of 8.10.2010 (40-55 % + tax on profit)Law of 25.4.2012 (30-55 %, depending on the games) Thuringia Law of 10.5.1994 (80 %, instead of 85 %)Law of 27.11.1997 (45-80 %)Law of 29.3.2011 (25-60 % + tax on profit)
Baden-Württemberg Law of 20.11.2012 (applicable as from 2010) (45-50 % + tax on profit, instead of 80 %)
Bavaria Law of 29.4.1999 (50-70 %, instead of 80 %)Law of 24.4.2001 (50-70 % – higher thresholds)Law of 9.5.2006 (50-60 %)Law of 14.4.2009 (35-40 %)Law of 14.4.2011 (30-35 %)Law of 24.5.2019 (25-30 %)
Berlin Law of 8.2.1999 (80-91 %, instead of 85 % in East Berlin and 80 % in West Berlin)Law of 3.3.2010 (applicable as form 1.1.2010) (40-50 % + tax on profit)
Brandenburg Law of 22.4.2003 (60-80 %, instead of 85 %)Law of 18.12.2007 (55-75 %)Law of 28.6.2012 (25-45 %)
Bremen Law of 18.12.2012 (applicable as from 1.1.2013) (40 %, instead of 80 %)
Hamburg Law of 16.11.1999 (70-90 %, instead of 80 %-90 %)Law of 23.5.2014 (55-80 % + tax on profit up to 10 % of the GGI)
Hesse Law of 13.12.2017 (75 % + weitere Leistungen, instead of 80 % + weitere Leistungen)
Mecklenburg-Vorpommern Law of 7.5.1996 (70-85 %, instead of 85 %)Law of 5.7.2004 (50-80 % + tax on profit)Law of 17.12.2009 (applicable as from 1.1.2007) (25-80 % + tax on profit)
Lower Saxony Law of 25.6.2003 (applicable as from 1.9.2002) (80 %, instead of 70-88 %).Law of 16.12.2004 (applicable as form 1.1.2005) (50-70 %).Law of 27.8.2009 (applicable as from 1.1.2009) (0-75 % + tax on profit)
NRW Law of 30.10.2007 (applicable as from 1.1.2008) (15-75 % + tax on profit, instead of 80 %)Law of 13.11.2012 (applicable as from 1.1.2012) (45-55 % + tax on profit)
Rhineland-Palatinate Law of 22.12.2015 (40-90 % + tax on profit, instead of 80 %)
Saarland Law of 9.7.2003 (62-72 %, instead of 80 %).Law of 5.5.2010 (52-62 %).Law of 4.12.2013 (applicable as from 1.2.2014) (39-49 % + tax on profit).
Saxony Law of 9.12.1993 (80 %, instead of 85 %)Law of 11.12.2002 (50-70 %)Law of 26.6.2009 (applicable as from 1.1.2007) (40-60 %)Law of 14.6.2012 (35-55 %)
Saxony-Anhalt Law of 26.6.1991 (80-92 %, instead of 85 %)Law of 30.7.1997 (50-80 %)Law of 30.8.2004 (70 %)Law of 16.12.2009 (25-50 % + tax on profit)
Schleswig-Holstein Finanzvertragfor the casino in Lübeck-Travemünde 1959 (80 %), 1964 (83 %), 1971 (85 %), 1972 (85.5 %).Finanzvertragfor the casino in Westerland 1949 (80 %), 1966 (71-80 %), 1972 (72-82 %)Law of 8.7.1976 (73-98-88 %)Law of 14.6.1982 (73-88 %)Law of 29.12.1995 (80 %)Law of 8.10.2010 (40-55 % + tax on profit)Law of 25.4.2012 (30-55 %, depending on the games)
Thuringia Law of 10.5.1994 (80 %, instead of 85 %)Law of 27.11.1997 (45-80 %)Law of 29.3.2011 (25-60 % + tax on profit)
Baden-Württemberg Law of 20.11.2012 (applicable as from 2010) (45-50 % + tax on profit, instead of 80 %)
Bavaria Law of 29.4.1999 (50-70 %, instead of 80 %)Law of 24.4.2001 (50-70 % – higher thresholds)Law of 9.5.2006 (50-60 %)Law of 14.4.2009 (35-40 %)Law of 14.4.2011 (30-35 %)Law of 24.5.2019 (25-30 %)
Berlin Law of 8.2.1999 (80-91 %, instead of 85 % in East Berlin and 80 % in West Berlin)Law of 3.3.2010 (applicable as form 1.1.2010) (40-50 % + tax on profit)
Brandenburg Law of 22.4.2003 (60-80 %, instead of 85 %)Law of 18.12.2007 (55-75 %)Law of 28.6.2012 (25-45 %)
Bremen Law of 18.12.2012 (applicable as from 1.1.2013) (40 %, instead of 80 %)
Hamburg Law of 16.11.1999 (70-90 %, instead of 80 %-90 %)Law of 23.5.2014 (55-80 % + tax on profit up to 10 % of the GGI)
Hesse Law of 13.12.2017 (75 % + weitere Leistungen, instead of 80 % + weitere Leistungen)
Mecklenburg-Vorpommern Law of 7.5.1996 (70-85 %, instead of 85 %)Law of 5.7.2004 (50-80 % + tax on profit)Law of 17.12.2009 (applicable as from 1.1.2007) (25-80 % + tax on profit)
Lower Saxony Law of 25.6.2003 (applicable as from 1.9.2002) (80 %, instead of 70-88 %).Law of 16.12.2004 (applicable as form 1.1.2005) (50-70 %).Law of 27.8.2009 (applicable as from 1.1.2009) (0-75 % + tax on profit)
NRW Law of 30.10.2007 (applicable as from 1.1.2008) (15-75 % + tax on profit, instead of 80 %)Law of 13.11.2012 (applicable as from 1.1.2012) (45-55 % + tax on profit)
Rhineland-Palatinate Law of 22.12.2015 (40-90 % + tax on profit, instead of 80 %)
Saarland Law of 9.7.2003 (62-72 %, instead of 80 %).Law of 5.5.2010 (52-62 %).Law of 4.12.2013 (applicable as from 1.2.2014) (39-49 % + tax on profit).
Saxony Law of 9.12.1993 (80 %, instead of 85 %)Law of 11.12.2002 (50-70 %)Law of 26.6.2009 (applicable as from 1.1.2007) (40-60 %)Law of 14.6.2012 (35-55 %)
Saxony-Anhalt Law of 26.6.1991 (80-92 %, instead of 85 %)Law of 30.7.1997 (50-80 %)Law of 30.8.2004 (70 %)Law of 16.12.2009 (25-50 % + tax on profit)
Schleswig-Holstein Finanzvertragfor the casino in Lübeck-Travemünde 1959 (80 %), 1964 (83 %), 1971 (85 %), 1972 (85.5 %).Finanzvertragfor the casino in Westerland 1949 (80 %), 1966 (71-80 %), 1972 (72-82 %)Law of 8.7.1976 (73-98-88 %)Law of 14.6.1982 (73-88 %)Law of 29.12.1995 (80 %)Law of 8.10.2010 (40-55 % + tax on profit)Law of 25.4.2012 (30-55 %, depending on the games)
Thuringia Law of 10.5.1994 (80 %, instead of 85 %)Law of 27.11.1997 (45-80 %)Law of 29.3.2011 (25-60 % + tax on profit)
(240) Contrary to what is abstractly argued by theLandHamburg, the fact that, after the changes, the casino tax ratemaybe the same as the pre-existing tax rate (‘up to 90 %’, before and after the changes), is not sufficient to consider that the change at stake is of a pure formal or administrative nature. Nothing ensures that this will be the case as this would depend on factual circumstances (in particular the level of GGI) which are not a feature of the scheme. Switching (as was the case in Hamburg in 1999) from a special tax system where the GGI is taxed at 80 % (with a mere possibility of an additional 10 %) to a special tax system where the GGI is taxed at 70 % (with a mere possibility of an additional 20 %) is an alteration, even if in both cases the maximum possible (hypothetical) rate is the same (90 %). Similarly, switching (as was the case in Hamburg in 2014) from a special tax system where the GGI is taxed at 70 % (with a mere possibility of an additional 20 %) to a special tax system where the GGI is taxed at 55 % rate (with a mere possibility of an additional 25 % and an additional tax on the profit capped at 10 % of the GGI) is an alteration even if in both cases the maximum possible (hypothetical) rate is the same (90 %). In addition, the change of design of the special taxes (the introduction of a tax, the tax base of which is the GGI instead of the profit) in any event constitutes a material alteration.
(241) The changes listed in Table 4 affect the constitutive features of the special taxes (affecting for instance the tax rate and/or the structure of the tax which became progressive). Those changes therefore constitute material alterations of any scheme potentially qualifying as an ‘existing’ scheme based on the recitals in Section 4.3(172).
(242) The changes also affected the substance of the schemes themselves and the alteration is thus not severable. As highlighted by the German courts(173), the very high (around 80 %) rate of the casino tax existing before such changes was deemed appropriate to cream off the profits of the public casinos operators, in line with the objective of the special tax rules. Therefore, a reduction of that rate, without any link or reference to the normal tax rules, has the potential to change the very nature and objective (and thus the substance) of the special tax schemes by turning a likely disadvantage (very high tax rate leading to a higher tax burden than under the normal rules) into an advantage. A change in the tax burden under the special tax rules – in the absence of any safeguard that the taxation will not be lower than under the normal tax rules – also endangers the ‘replacement’ and ‘skimming’ logic of the special tax treatment and thus the objectives assigned to it. In addition, in cases where the special tax regime of public casinos did not lead in the past to actual advantages in particular because the casino tax rate remained high, the materialisation of an actual advantage (during the recovery period) after a general reduction of the special taxes would necessarily mean that the alteration (the general reduction of the special taxes) affected the ‘replacement’ objective of the special tax treatment and thus its substance.
(243) As the substance of the schemes is affected, the entirety of the advantage arising from the schemes constitutes new aid. Any actual advantage for public casinos operators arising after these changes(174)constitutes new aid, whatever the qualification (as existing or new) of the special tax rules as they existed before the alteration.
(244) It is true that, as argued by theLandRhineland-Palatinate, some of the normal taxes (for example the corporate tax rate) were also reduced over time. However, the Commission considers that this is not sufficient to claim that the two tax systems evolved ‘in parallel’ as claimed by theLand: reductions in the special taxes were not motivated by a parallel decrease in the normal taxes; and the evolution of the normal tax rules, especially trade tax and corporate tax, which concern all undertakings, was never motivated by a parallel evolution of the special taxes which only concern public casinos operators. This is also evidenced by the fact that the special tax rules evolved on different paths (and different times) in the differentLänderwhile the changes under the normal tax rules (especially the corporate tax reduction mentioned by theLandRhineland-Palatinate) applied uniformly at national level or were defined at municipal level (for changes in the trade tax rate or the entertainment tax). In addition, because there is no automatic mechanism to ensure that the special tax rules lead to the same tax burden as under the normal tax rules, no precise comparison between the two sets of tax rules could be carried out and it was thus from the outset not even possible to modify one set of tax rules to (exactly) follow the evolutions of the other set of tax rules. TheLandRhineland-Palatinate itself acknowledges that the temporal evolution of the entertainment tax cannot be precisely described and thus implicitly acknowledges that the two tax systems could not evolve in parallel.
(245) Even if the two tax regimes evolved in parallel, it would in any event be incorrect to consider that those changes in both sets of tax rules would not be material alterations because they would not lead to a difference in the tax burden. Even if they would not lead to an (additional) advantage, parallel reductions in the tax burden under the normal and the special tax rules are to be regarded as material alterations because they actually change the tax burden to be paid by the operators at stake. In addition, a reduction in the tax burden under the special tax rules, if only motivated by a parallel reduction of the normal taxes, would disregard the skimming logic of the special tax rules (which should be achieved whatever the level of the tax burden under the normal tax rules) and thus their own objective and substance.
(246) The material and substantial alterations arising from the modification of the rates of the special taxes and from the changes to the structure of the special taxes give rise to new aid as from the alteration (and for the entirety of the advantage, see recitals (242) and (243)). This applies in East Berlin and Saxony where the special tax schemes were, before that alteration, existing measures put into effect before the entry into force of the TFEU. In the other cases (Brandenburg, Mecklenburg-Vorpommern, Saxony-Anhalt and Thuringia and all West GermanLänder), these substantial alterations serve as an alternative reasoning that there is new aid in any event, that is in addition to the main line of reasoning that the special tax treatment of the public casinos operators active during the recovery period in theseLänderis based on new measures (see recitals (213) and (214) for the East GermanLänderand Sections 4.3.1.2 and 4.3.2.1 for the West GermanLänder).
(247) Moreover, the amount of casino tax (or other special taxes) is or was, in certainLänder, reduced in certain circumstances (see measures 2.a, 2.b, 4.b and 4.c, as defined in Section 3.1.4.4 and Annexes 1, 2A and 2B of the opening decision). The laws introducing such tax reductions and the corresponding ad hoc decisions reducing the tax burden under the special tax rules were also adopted after the entry into force of the TFEU(175). They also constitute substantial alterations to the measures put into effect before the entry into force of the TFEU (if any) and these substantial alterations give rise to new aid as from the alteration and for the entirety of the advantage for the same reasons as for the general reductions (see recital (242)).
(248) According to the German authorities, the exemption from income taxes laid down by Article 6(1) of the 1938 law, as interpreted by the 1954 ‘administrative agreement’ (Verwaltungsabkommen), covers surcharges related to corporate tax and income tax. The solidarity surcharge (Solidaritätszuschlag), introduced in 1991 (before the beginning of the recovery period), constitutes such a surcharge. Public casinos operators in allLänderare thus exempted from the solidarity surcharge based on Article 6(1) of the 1938 law. However, according to the case-law of the Court of Justice(176), since the tax was introduced after the entry into force of the TFEU, the corresponding exemption (in eachLand) is a ‘new’ measure. The introduction of the new normal tax constitutes a material and substantial alteration to the pre-existing measures.
(249) Such an alteration would transform ‘existing’ schemes (that is schemes predating entry into force of the TFEU which have not been altered since that date), if any, into new aid schemes. By analogy to the reasoning mentioned in recital (242), an increase in the tax burden under the normal tax rules (as resulted from the introduction of the solidarity surcharge in 1991) – without any link to the special tax rules and without a parallel change in the special tax rules – endangers the replacement objective of the special tax rules and thus the intrinsic functioning of the measures and their substance. As a consequence, the entirety of the advantage arising from the schemes as from the alteration (which predates the beginning of the recovery period) constitutes new aid.
(250) Any aid arising from the special tax schemes applicable to the public casinos operators in eachLand, during the recovery period, constitutes new aid for the cumulative reasons mentioned in Sections 4.3.1.1, 4.3.1.2, 4.3.2.1, 4.3.2.2.2 and 4.3.2.2.3. As that aid was not notified to the Commission, it constitutes unlawful aid.
(251) The measures, to the extent they are aid (‘the aid measures’), qualify as operating aid, as they are not linked to any specific investment or project. Operating aid that merely diminishes the normal costs of an undertaking cannot be regarded as compatible with the internal market(177).
(252) The German federal authorities merely submitted that the measures pursue an objective of general interest (by referring to their arguments about the public mission carried out by public casinos operators), are necessary, appropriate and proportionate. SHSWSN also vaguely argued that the aid would be compatible following the reasoning made by the Commission in the Decision of 20 September 2011 concerning the duties for online gaming in Denmark(178), because the aid would aim at ensuring player protection.
(253) While it is up to the Member State to explain in detail why the measures are compatible with the internal market, the German authorities did not further support their claims and did not explain on which legal basis the measures could be regarded as compatible. SHSWSN also did not provide any precise explanation as to why the measures would be necessary, appropriate and proportionate.
(254) In general, because of the absence of reference to certain costs, the absence of limit to the amount of aid (advantage) and the lack of even basic information about the amount of aid (in the absence of information on the tax burden under the normal tax rules), the aid cannot be found to be proportionate and transparent, which are general requirements for a measure to be regarded as compatible with the internal market. It is thus also not comparable to the situation covered by the Commission Decision of 20 September 2011 which, in particular, found the aid to be proportionate and appropriate in the light of several economic studies showing that the reduced rate of gambling duty applicable to online games was set at the appropriate level (the rate could not have been higher – limiting the advantage – as this would have prevented operators to enter the legal market while this was precisely the objective of the measure). Also, the Commission’s decision-making practice in other cases cannot affect the legality of a decision, which can be assessed only in the light of the objective rules of the TFEU.
(255) The overall argumentation of the German authorities and, in particular, the alleged objective of the measures (to allow the public casinos operators to maintain their operations because they would perform a public task), seem to refer implicitly to Article 107(3), point (c), TFEU (aid to facilitate the development of certain economic activities) and Article 106(2) TFEU.
(256) As already underlined, the measures are operating aid and bear no link to any costs (investment costs or even operating costs). Operating aid cannot, in principle, satisfy the conditions for the application of Article 107(3), point (c), TFEU as such aid, given that it does no more than maintain an existing situation or lower the usual ongoing operating expenditure which an undertaking would have had to bear in any event in the course of its normal business, cannot be regarded as being intended to facilitate the development of an economic activity and is such as to affect trading conditions adversely to an extent contrary to the common interest(179). In addition, Germany did not even argue that the operating aids in question would be equivalent to investment aid and it is indeed not the case for the measures, as the operating aids are not related to any investment of the beneficiaries. Furthermore, the amount of the advantage provided by the schemes isa priorinot limited and cannot be proportionate and limited to the minimum necessary to prevent undue distortions of competition and effects on trade. The aid thus cannot be compatible under Article 107(3), point (c), TFEU.
(257) As already argued (see Section 4.2.5.2.2), the activities of public casinos cannot be regarded as clearly defined services of general economic interest. Furthermore, there is no mechanism for ensuring that the aid at stake would be limited and no entrustment act specifying the methods of calculating the compensation. Thus, even assuming that public casinos operators would carry out a genuine service of general economic interest (which the Commission disputes), nothing ensures that the compensation granted for the provision of such a service does not exceed what is necessary to cover the net cost of discharging the public service obligations(180). The aid thus cannot be compatible under Article 106(2) TFEU.
(258) One public casinos operator (SBN) considers that Article 107(3), point (b), TFEU would be the compatibility basis for a possible State aid. The compatibility criteria applicable in such cases have been laid down in the Communication from the Commission — Criteria for the analysis of the compatibility with the internal market of State aid to promote the execution of important projects of common European interest(181). The measures do not concern a ‘project’ within the meaning of the criteria laid down in paragraphs 12 and 13 of that Communication. They also do not concern a project of ‘common European interest’ because they do not involve several Member States as required by the criteria laid down in paragraph 16 of the Communication.
(259) The measures’ lack of proportionality (a general compatibility requirement) would thus in any event make the aid incompatible, whatever legal basis is used for the compatibility assessment.
(260) In the light of the foregoing, the aid measures are not compatible with the internal market.
(261) According to the TFEU and the established case-law of the Court of Justice, the Commission is competent to decide that the Member State concerned shall alter or abolish aid that is found to be incompatible with the internal market(182).
(262) As the measures constitute unlawful and incompatible State aid (except the measure in place – as from 1 January 2024 –– in theLandHamburg), the German authorities should put an end to these aid schemes (for example by abolishing the special tax rules or by otherwise ensuring that they do not provide an advantage). The German authorities should inform the Commission services within four months following the date of notification of this Decision of the measures taken. The amended tax rules shall apply at the latest with effect from the tax year following the notification of this Decision (see recital (269)).
(263) The Court of Justice has also consistently held that the obligation on a Member State to abolish aid regarded by the Commission as being incompatible with the internal market is designed to re-establish the previously existing situation(183). In this context, the Court of Justice has established that this objective is attained once the recipient has repaid the amounts granted by way of unlawful aid, thus forfeiting the advantage which it had enjoyed over its competitors on the internal market, and the situation prior to the payment of the aid is restored(184).
(264) In line with the case-law of the Court of Justice, Article 16(1) of Regulation (EU) 2015/1589 states that ‘where negative decisions are taken in cases of unlawful aid, the Commission shall decide that the Member State concerned shall take all necessary measures to recover the aid from the beneficiary’.
(265) Thus, given that the aid measures in question were implemented in breach of Article 108(3), TFEU (they were not notified to the Commission), and are to be considered as unlawful and incompatible aid, they should be recovered in order to re-establish the situation that existed on the internal market prior to their granting. Recovery should cover the time period from the date when the aid was put at the disposal of the beneficiaries, that is the date on which the normal taxes should have been paid, until effective recovery. The amount to be recovered should bear interest from the date on which it was put at the disposal of the beneficiaries until effective recovery. The interest should be calculated on a compound basis in accordance with Chapter V of Regulation (EC) No 794/2004.
(266) According to Article 17(1) of Regulation (EU) 2015/1589, the powers of the Commission to recover aid are subject to a limitation period of ten years. According to Article 17(2) of that Regulation, the limitation period is to begin on the day on which the unlawful aid is awarded to the beneficiary. Any action taken by the Commission or by a Member State, acting at the request of the Commission, with regard to the unlawful aid interrupts the limitation period. Consequently, the decisive factor in determining the starting point of the limitation period referred to in Article 17 is when the aid was in fact awarded. That provision refers to the award of aid to a beneficiary, not the date on which an aid scheme was adopted. In the case of a scheme entailing advantages granted on a periodic basis (which is the case here for the measures), there may be a considerable period between the date on which an act forming the legal basis of the aid is adopted and the date on which the undertakings concerned will actually be granted the aid. In such a case, for the purpose of calculating the limitation period, the aid must be regarded as not having been awarded to the beneficiary until the date on which it was in fact received by the beneficiary(185). Therefore, the limitation period starts to run each year on the date on which the normal taxes were due, although the act forming the legal basis of the aid may have been adopted before that date.
(267) The obligation on Germany to recover the aid will therefore cover the ten years preceding the date on which the Commission first asked Germany for information on the aid measures. As the first information request was sent on 8 March 2017, the recovery starts with the 2007 taxation year. Thus, only aid awarded under the aid schemes after 8 March 2007 can be regarded as new aid that can be recovered.
(268) The amount of the aid to be recovered consists of the positive difference between the amount of tax that the public casinos operators would have paid under the normal tax rules and the amount of tax that they actually paid under the special tax rules, taking into account the effect of all measures (including the ad hoc reductions of the special taxes) and cumulated over the whole recovery period. Given that, under the special tax rules, an operator may have benefitted from advantages and suffered from disadvantages depending on the tax years and specific circumstances, the actual advantage to be recovered should be the positive sum (if any) of these (positive and negative) amounts, including recovery interests. This will ensure recovery of the advantage actually provided by the measures over the recovery period. This methodology is justified in this specific case given the reasoning used in the State aid assessment of the schemes (the existence of a ‘potential advantage’, while its materialisation is examined in the recovery phase). Furthermore, Germany put forward arguments based on national tax law (normal tax rules) justifying such a global approach across tax years instead of a yearly approach in this particular case where the measures can lead to advantages and disadvantages: Germany in particular mentioned the possibility of carrying the losses of one particular tax year to another tax year (carry forward and/or carry back) for taxes on profit(186), as well as depreciations and provisions (Abschreibungen und Rücklagen), i.e. mechanisms which allow compensating profits and losses and spreading the tax burden over several years. In the same vein, Germany explained that German tax law enables the offsetting of tax debt across calendar years(187). This approach also appears in line with the consideration that intrinsically linked measures having various effects should be assessed globally, taking into account related disadvantages(188). This implies that recovery should take into account the same perspective, not restricted to individual tax years seen as independent from one another.
(269) In general, Germany must implement recovery effectively and immediately in accordance with Article 16(2) and (3) of Regulation (EU) 2015/1589. As the measures are tax measures involving at least to some extent annual taxes, this assessment can only be done, for a particular tax year, after that tax year has elapsed. Therefore, the assessment for the tax year during which the Decision is adopted (‘the current tax year’) should take place after that tax year has elapsed.
(270) In order to determine the tax burden under the normal tax rules, the German authorities should apply usual corporate tax, income tax (and related additional taxes), trade tax and entertainment tax rules.
(271) In particular, in order to calculate the amount of entertainment tax due by public casinos operators, it should be kept in mind that, most of the time, municipal entertainment tax laws were not specifically designed to apply to public casinos and the games they offer because of the tax exemption applicable to public casinos in the laws of theLänderon public casinos. The cities(189)thus never had the occasion in the recent past to make use of their competence to tax public casinos. This means that the authorities competent to lay down the main features of the entertainment tax should place themselves in the situation which would have existed in the absence of the measures examined in the present decision. In the absence of the exemption from entertainment tax (and in the absence of the special taxes), the cities would have had to decide how to tax these entertainment activities (without being able to argue – by definition – that they cannot tax them because of the existing exemptions). In doing so, the cities should in particular comply with the general principles of Union and German law (such as the non-discrimination principle) and the specific principles of taxation under the entertainment tax. The German authorities are thus invited, within four months following notification of this Decision, to submit the appropriate way to calculate the entertainment tax applicable to public casinos in the different cities. In that regard, the following considerations should guide the German authorities.
(272) The entertainment tax should be applied using the most appropriate triggering event in the light of the objective of the tax and, if any, of the specificities of the games offered by public casinos. This means in particular that, given the similarity between the games offered by public casinos and the games offered by gambling halls(190), the cities should tax all those games of chance in a similar manner. Thus, the gambling activities of public casinos operator (gambling machines, and table games, if any) should in principle be taxed using the features (tax base and tax rate) laid down by each municipal entertainment tax law for the taxation of gambling machines in gambling halls, unless the entertainment tax law of the city in question lays down a more specific or appropriate method to calculate the tax for table games(191).
(273) In addition, it could be that certain cities intend or decide to levy the entertainment tax in the form of a tax on the bets placed by the players (Spieleinsatz/Spieleraufwand), as a few cities did in respect of gambling machines in gambling halls. In such a case, the cities should duly take into account the specificity of the public casinos in terms of pay-out, as they did when they introduced an entertainment tax on bets for gambling halls(192).
(274) For simplification purposes, when calculating the amount of entertainment tax that would have been due by public casinos operators, the German authorities could decide to apply a rate of 25 % of the GGI, which would in principle constitute the highest possible level of entertainment tax that can be imposed on public casinos operators(193). The German authorities can alternatively decide to carry out more refined calculations using the concrete entertainment tax rates applicable in the relevant municipalities, in order to determine the precise amount of entertainment tax.
(275) In any case, as already underlined (see recital (271)), the calculation method chosen by the cities should be based on credible documentation and comply with the general principles of Union and German law (such as the non-discrimination principle) and the specific principles of taxation under the entertainment tax. The German authorities are invited to provide, within four months following the notification of this Decision, the explanations on the calculation method in an appropriate and streamlined format, specifying the reasoning for the chosen method in order to enable the Commission services to verify it. Within six months following the notification of this Decision, Germany should submit the precise calculations covering the time period until the end of the tax year preceding the notification of this Decision and establish, based on those calculations, the exact amount of aid to be recovered including recovery interest.
(276) In response to the fact (alleged by theLandHamburg) that the operators would have behaved differently under different tax rules (the normal tax rules), so that no comparison can be made, it is appropriate to highlight that, pursuant to the case-law, aid subject to recovery should not take into account hypothetical elements such as the choices, often numerous, which could have been made by the beneficiaries, since the choices actually made with the aid might prove to be irreversible(194).
(277) Some public casinos operators (SHSWSN) argue that recovery should in this case be prohibited because (i) it is contrary to the protection of legitimate expectations of the beneficiaries which always paid their taxes, (ii) the special tax rules exist since 1938 and (iii) ordering recovery would endanger the public task carried out by public casinos operators.
(278) However, in view of the fundamental role played by the notification obligation to render effective the review of State aid by the Commission, which is mandatory, the recipients of aid may not, in principle, entertain a legitimate expectation that the aid is lawful unless it has been granted in compliance with the procedure provided for in Article 108 TFEU and a diligent business operator must normally be in a position to confirm that that procedure has been followed(195). The measures were however not notified to the Commission and therefore not approved by the Commission. In addition, the fact that the special tax rules existed since 1938 aims at arguing that the measure is existing aid, which has been rebutted in Section 4.3. Furthermore, the operators at stake do not explain why ordering recovery of an undue competitive advantage would endanger the public task they allegedly (recital (128)) carry out and why it would constitute a violation of a fundamental principle of Union law.
(279) During the formal investigation procedure, Germany explained that the calculations necessary to carry out recovery are complex and rely on figures dating back to 2007 in some instances; besides, the data would not be easily available (some operators have left the market, while some data disappeared as a consequence of the 2021 floods in Rhineland-Palatinate). The German authorities also argue that, to receive the relevant data, they have to rely on the cooperation of the beneficiaries (public casinos operators) who might be hesitant to provide it in the context of a recovery case. They suggest a time period of 18 months to implement the recovery decision.
(280) It cannot be ruled out that, in implementing the complex calculation methodology described in recitals (268) to (274), Germany may need additional time (compared to the usual practice) to establish the amounts to be recovered. In line with the Commission Notice on the recovery of unlawful and incompatible State aid(196), with respect to the timing for the recovery from individual beneficiaries of the unlawful and incompatible State aid amounts, the German authorities should have four months starting from the date of the end of the current tax year to establish the final aid amounts to be recovered and six months starting from that same date to actually implement the recovery. These deadlines accommodate the fact, mentioned in recital (269), that the assessment for the current tax year can only be done after that tax year has elapsed.
(281) The Commission finds that Germany has unlawfully implemented the aid measures in question in breach of Article 108(3) of the TFEU. The aid measures are not compatible with the internal market. Consequently, Germany must put an end to those aid measures and recover from the public casinos operators the difference between the amount of tax that they would have paid under the normal tax rules and the amount of tax that they actually paid under the special tax rules.
(a) a detailed description of the measures taken to put an end to the aid schemes;
(b) detailed explanations on the calculation methodology chosen to establish the entertainment tax.
(a) calculations of the amount of aid received under the aid schemes referred to in Article 1 by each of the beneficiaries until the end of the tax year preceding the notification of this Decision;
(b) calculations of the amount (principal and recovery interests) to be recovered until the end of the tax year preceding the notification of this Decision.
(a) the total and final amount of aid received by each of the beneficiaries under the schemes (including the current tax year);
(b) the total amount (principal and recovery interests) to be recovered from each beneficiary;
(c) documents demonstrating that the beneficiaries have been ordered to repay the aid.
THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,
Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular Article 108(2), first subparagraph, thereof,
Having regard to the Agreement on the European Economic Area, and in particular Article 62(1), point (a), thereof,
Having called on interested parties to submit their comments pursuant to the provisions cited above and having regard to their comments,
Whereas:
1. PROCEDURE
(1) On 22 March 2016 and 4 February 2019, the Commission received four complaints filed by a trade association of gambling machines operators (Fachverband Spielhallen e.V.) and an operator of gambling machines (‘the complainants’). The complainants claimed that operators of the public casinos (Spielbankunternehmer, ‘public casinos operators’) in Germany receive State aid through various measures which allegedly distort the market for gambling services:
—
Measure 1: the reduction of the amount of the casino tax paid by public casinos operators by the amount of the value added tax (‘VAT’) (‘VAT offsetting mechanism’) introduced by all 16 German Länder after 2006;
—
Measure 2: the provisions of laws on public casinos of seven Länder reducing (‘measure 2.a’) or allowing the authorities of the Länder to reduce the casino tax rate in the first years of operation of a public casino, as well as the actual implementation (if any) of this possibility (‘measure 2.b’);
—
Measure 3: the deduction from the tax base of the trade tax and the corporate or income tax of the ‘profit skimming’ (Gewinnabschöpfung) paid by the public casinos operators in North Rhine-Westphalia (‘NRW’) with respect to their non-gambling activities;
—
Measure 4: the alleged guarantee to public casino operators in all 16 Länder to make a reasonable commercial profit (‘measure 4.a’) and the explicit provisions of laws on public casinos in nine Länder reducing (‘measure 4.b’) or allowing the authorities of the Länder to reduce the casino tax in specific cases, as well as the actual implementation (if any) of this possibility (‘measure 4.c’);
—
Measure 5: the overall special tax system generally applicable to public casinos operators with regard to their gambling related activities, which would induce a lower tax burden compared to the rules applicable to operators of commercial gambling halls.
(2) By letter dated 9 December 2019 (‘the opening decision’), the Commission considered that measure 3 and measure 4.a did not constitute State aid (1), but informed Germany that it had decided to initiate the procedure laid down in Article 108(2) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) in respect of the following measures:
—
the special tax rules generally applicable to public casinos operators in each of the 16 German Länder (‘measure 5’), composed of several tax exemptions and special taxes, including all the general and automatic features of these special taxes (including in particular measure 1, measure 2.a and measure 4.b);
—
the ad hoc decisions of the public authorities to reduce the special taxes applicable to the public casinos operators in case of openings of new public casinos (‘measure 2.b’) and under other circumstances (‘measure 4.c’).
(3) The opening decision was published in the Official Journal of the European Union (2). The Commission invited interested parties to submit their comments on the measures.
(4) On 28 February 2020, the German federal authorities and a number of Länder submitted comments.
(5) The Commission also received comments from public casinos operators and an association of such operators:
—
Spielbank Bad Homburg Wicker & Co. KG (25 March 2020),
—
European Casino Association (3 July 2020),
—
Spielbank Hamburg Jahr + Achterfeld GmbH & Co. KG, Spielbank Wiesbaden GmbH & Co. KG and Spielbanken Niedersachsen GmbH (3 July 2020),
—
François-Blanc-Spielbank GmbH (Bad Homburg v.d. Höhe) (4 July 2020),
—
Spielbank Bad Neuenahr GmbH & Co. KG (3 August 2020),
(6) On 5 August 2020, the complainants submitted comments.
(7) On 14 August 2020, the Commission forwarded the comments by interested parties (public casinos operators, association of such operators and the complainants) to Germany, which was given the opportunity to react. Germany provided comments by letter dated 17 September 2020.
(8) The Commission services requested additional information from the German authorities by letters of 11 March 2020, 19 June 2020 (complemented by letter of 25 June 2020), 19 September 2020, 23 September 2021, 14 January 2022, 13 July 2022, 14 December 2022, 22 November 2023 and 21 March 2024. Germany (the federal authorities and, as the case may be, the Länder) replied on 7 May 2020, 10 July 2020, 19 January 2021 (complemented by letters of 25 March 2021, 20 September 2021 and 15 January 2024), 22 October 2021 (complemented by letters of 19 November 2021 and 21 January 2022), 4 March 2022, 1 September 2022, 14 February 2023, 11 December 2023 and 4 April 2024.
(9) The complainants submitted further information on 25 November 2021, 29 August 2022 and 23 November 2022.
2. DESCRIPTION OF THE MEASURES AND BACKGROUND OF THE CASE
2.1. Organisation and regulation of gambling in Germany
(10) For the purpose of this Decision, the German legal system can be regarded as distinguishing between two types of games of chance.
(11) On the one hand, certain gambling machines can be freely operated by specialised gambling halls (Spielhallen or gewerbliche Spielhallen, ‘gambling halls’ or ‘commercial gambling halls’) or by restaurants, provided that the rules of the Regulation on gaming devices and other games with the possibility of winning (Spielverordnung) (3) are complied with. According to the gambling halls regulations of the Länder (Spielhallengesetze) and to the German commercial ordinance (Gewerbeordnung), a licence is necessary to operate commercial gambling halls.
(12) On the other hand, casino games (blackjack, roulette, poker, etc., also called ‘table games’, in German also großes Spiel or Tischspiel) and certain gambling machines are considered to be too risky and offering such games is in principle prohibited. By way of derogation from that rule, the German Länder are competent to allow certain entities (the public casinos operators) to offer such games, through concessions granted at Länder level, on the basis of the conditions laid down by the laws of the Länder on public casinos (Spielbankgesetze).
(13) There are differences between the games offered by public casinos and the games offered by commercial gambling halls. Casino games are in principle prohibited, are characterised by high personnel costs and can only be offered in public casinos. Gambling machines operated by public casinos and by commercial gambling halls are subject to different regulations: only the machines operated by commercial gambling halls are subject to a variety of restrictions and, in particular, have to comply with technical regulations preventing the possibility of unreasonably high losses in short periods of time. On the other hand, access to public casinos is restricted (entrance controls, limited number of public casinos per Land) while commercial gambling halls offer their services to a broader clientele.
2.2. Tax treatment of public casinos operators
(14) Public casinos operators are subject to the normal tax system as regards the income they generate from their non-gambling related activities (for example when they operate restaurants) (4).
(15) As regards their gambling income (income from casino games and gambling machines) and gambling-related income (e.g. entrance fees, tips, sale of gambling magazines, rental of ties and jackets), public casinos operators are subject to special taxes only applicable to them (see Section 2.2.1) and exempted from a number of otherwise applicable taxes (see Section 2.2.2), the exemptions being intrinsically linked to the special taxes (see Section 2.2.3).
2.2.1. The special taxes applying to public casinos operators for their gambling income
(16) For their gambling income (in the broad sense, that is to say encompassing the gambling income stricto sensu as well as the gambling-related income (5)), public casinos operators are subject to a special tax or special taxes laid down, in each Land, in a law of the Land (Spielbankgesetz).
(17) Those special taxes mostly use as a tax base the gross gambling income stricto sensu (‘GGI’, that is to say the bets placed by the players minus the winnings distributed to the players, Bruttospielertrag), which is the main source of gambling-related income for public casinos operators.
(18) The special taxes always include a so-called ‘casino tax’ (Spielbankabgabe) calculated on the basis of the GGI. In most Länder, the tax rate is progressive depending on the GGI.
(19) In addition to the casino tax, several laws of the Länder lay down an additional tax on the GGI, under different names (weitere Leistung(en), Zusatzabgabe, zusätzliche Leistungen).
(20) In all Länder, the laws on public casinos lay down a reduction of the amount of casino tax by the amount of (net) VAT to be paid by the public casinos operators (VAT offsetting mechanism, measure 1).
(21) Some of the special taxes on the GGI are also sometimes automatically reduced by the laws of the Länder on public casinos after new public casinos are opened (measure 2.a) or in circumstances other than the opening of new public casinos (measure 4.b).
(22) In certain Länder, the special taxes on the GGI (or some of them) can be temporarily reduced, for the past or the future, by ad hoc decisions of the public authorities concerning one or several public casinos operators (measure 2.b for newly opened public casinos and measure 4.c in other circumstances).
(23) In addition to the special taxes on the GGI, several laws of the Länder lay down an additional tax on the tips received by staff of the public casinos (Troncabgabe).
(24) In addition to the taxes on the gambling turnover, several laws of the Länder (6) lay down an additional tax on the residual annual profit (Jahresergebnis or Gewinn, in essence calculated on the basis of turnover minus costs) of the public casinos operators, calculated using various methods and under various names (Gewinnabschöpfung, weitere Abgabe, Gewinnabgabe, Abführung des Überschusses).
(25) The laws of the Länder sometimes provide that the money collected under the special taxes has to be used by the Länder to finance specific public expenses in the general interest.
(26) As from 1 January 2024 (7), in the Land Hamburg, the public casino operator is also liable to pay an equalization tax (Ausgleichsabgabe) in order to ensure that the operator pays at least the same amount of tax as it would pay if it were subject to the normal tax rules (as if there were no special taxes and no tax exemptions; this normal tax burden includes in particular corporate and/or income tax, trade tax and entertainment tax). The equalization tax is equal to the difference (if it is a positive amount) between the tax amount that would be due under the normal tax rules and the tax amount to be paid by the operator under the special tax rules. The operator must submit an annual declaration for the equalization tax to the tax office no later than six months after the end of the financial year (8) and the payment of the equalization tax should be made according to the general rules of the German tax ordinance. The German authorities have committed to calculate the entertainment tax on the basis of the provisions of the entertainment tax law of Hamburg applicable to gambling machines (Spielgeräte mit Geldgewinnmöglichkeit), which amounts to 5 % of the amount of the bets (9) placed in the public casino. Personal income tax and other income taxes (Ertragsteuern) are to be calculated using the highest applicable tax rate.
2.2.2. The normal taxes from which public casinos operators are exempted
(27) In Germany, undertakings (including gambling halls) are normally subject to a series of general taxes, mainly income tax (Einkommensteuer) or corporate tax (Körperschaftsteuer) and the related solidarity surcharge (Solidaritätszuschlag), trade tax (Gewerbesteuer) and VAT (10).
(28) The main features of VAT, corporate tax and income tax (tax base and tax rate) are laid down at national level. Corporate tax and income tax are general taxes on profit and VAT is a general tax on turnover. Trade tax is another general tax on profit: the tax base (Messbetrag) is defined at national level, together with a minimum rate, but the municipalities are competent to set the rate (Hebesatz).
(29) Apart from those general taxes, undertakings offering gaming services (11) are also usually subject to a specific municipal tax, the entertainment tax (Vergnügungsteuer), except in Bavaria. The Länder are competent to allow the municipalities to introduce the entertainment tax. The features (in particular the rates and the base) of such taxes are laid down at municipal level within the framework (maximum or minimum rate, tax base) set by the Land if it decided to do so. The tax is usually calculated as either a percentage of the amounts spent by the entertained person (12) (bets, entrance fee) or of the GGI generated by the entertaining entity or, as in earlier legislation, a lump-sum per entertaining device (gambling machine) or per surface dedicated to the entertainment activities. The entertainment tax laws of the municipalities usually apply to gambling machines or gambling devices (Spielgeräte, Spielautomaten, Spielapparate) and lay down a tax base (usually the GGI or the amount of the bets) and a tax rate (around 20 % if the tax base is the GGI, around 5 % if the tax base is the bets). The entertainment tax laws also sometimes apply to the playing for money (Ausspielen von Geld, Geldausspielungen) for which they also lay down a tax base and tax rate.
(30) The normal tax rules for different operators may thus vary depending on a series of conditions (for example, the trade tax and entertainment tax rate depends on the location of the operator, while corporate tax and personal income tax are alternatively applied depending on an entity’s legal form) and can evolve over time.
(31) Public casinos operators are exempted from a number of those otherwise applicable taxes.
(32) According to Article 6(1) of a 1938 law in Germany on public casinos (the ‘1938 law’) (13), which is still in force, public casinos operators are exempted from ‘national taxes levied on income, wealth, turnover and from the lottery tax and the capital duty
’
. Following a 1954 administrative agreement (Verwaltungsabkommen dated 30 November 1954) interpreting that provision, Article 6(1) of the 1938 law is regarded as exempting public casinos operators from corporate tax (or, if applicable, income tax (14)) and related surcharges, such as the solidarity surcharge (Solidaritätszuschlag) introduced in 1991, and from VAT. The VAT exemption arising from the 1938 law was replaced by another provision in the VAT law of 1967 and was later abolished in April 2006 so that public casinos operators are since then subject to the normal VAT rules (see Section 3.1.4.3 of the opening decision for more details). Although Article 6(1) of the 1938 law would also constitute a basis for an exemption from the lottery tax (Lotteriesteuer), that provision is of no effect since public casinos operators do not organise games or events that would be subject to that tax (15). The capital duty (Gesellschaftsteuer) and the wealth tax (Vermögensteuer), explicitly mentioned in Article 6(1) of the 1938 law, have been abolished in 1992 and 1997 respectively (16) and thus, in practice, those exemptions have had no impact since then.
(33) Moreover, according to Article 6(2) of the 1938 law, ‘the extent to which public casinos operators are to be exempted from taxes of the Länder and of the municipalities is to be determined’ by the competent ministers (today, the ministers of the Länder). On the basis of that provision, the German authorities adopted further specific provisions specifying the scope of the exemption from taxes of the Länder and of the municipalities (17). According to the German authorities, those provisions have the effect of exempting public casinos operators from the trade tax and, where it exists, the entertainment tax (18). The trade tax exemption for public casinos operators is also, since 1995, laid down specifically in Article 3(1) of the trade tax law (Gewerbesteuergesetz) (19).
(34) As a consequence of those tax exemptions, municipalities in which a public casino is operated suffer a shortfall in tax revenue because, in principle, municipalities collect the trade tax and the entertainment tax from which public casinos operators are exempted. This shortfall in tax revenue is usually compensated by payments by the Länder (which collect the special taxes imposed on public casinos operators) (20).
2.2.3. The objective of the special tax treatment
(35) The objective of the special tax systems of the Länder (including the special taxes and the tax exemptions) is twofold.
(36) The casino tax and, more generally, all special taxes paid by the public casinos operators are considered to be a replacement for the other taxes from which the public casinos operators are exempted (Abgeltung). In addition, according to a 1933 law (21) in Germany (‘the 1933 law’), the profit of public casinos operators should not benefit private interests but should be ‘skimmed’ or ‘creamed off’ for purposes of public benefit (Abschöpfung).
(37) The special tax system applicable to public casinos operators in each Land indeed first aims at replacing the taxes from which the public casinos operators are exempted (Abgeltung), that is to say that the normal taxes are deemed to be paid in the form of a special tax (22). From that perspective, public casinos operators are not really exempted from the normal taxes: the tax exemptions applicable to those operators merely mean that their special taxes are deemed to replace the normal taxes; the tax exemptions thus simply aim at preventing double taxation (23) and the amount paid under the special tax rules should in principle be the same as under the normal taxes.
(38) In addition, because the German legislator considered that the public casinos operators (regarded as monopolies (24)) would otherwise make a ‘very high profit’ under the normal tax rules, the special tax rules aim at skimming (creaming off) the profit of these operators which would not have been creamed off under normal tax rules (Abschöpfung) (25). As recalled by the German courts, the objective of the tax system applicable to public casinos operators was to ‘cream off’ their revenues. The underlying idea is to tax as much as possible the profits resulting from a socially unwanted but inevitable activity and from a business regarded as shielded from competition, an objective which the normal tax system could not achieve in the view of the German authorities at the time (26). There is however a limit within that second objective. The profit of the public casinos operators should be creamed off as far as possible but the special tax rules should not go beyond the economic viability limit (Wirtschaftlichkeitsgrenze) and should thus leave the operators an ‘appropriate’ profit. Public casinos however went bankrupt in the past (27), in particular because of the high tax burden under the special tax rules and the resulting low profitability.
2.2.4. The inseparable link between the special taxes and the exemptions from normal taxes
(39) As consistently explained by the German authorities (quoting the case-law of the Federal Finance Court (28)) and by the complainants, both sets of measures described in Sections 2.2.1 and 2.2.2 (the special taxes and the tax exemptions) are intrinsically linked and make ‘sense’ only if considered as a whole. The general idea of a special tax and of the corresponding tax exemptions was set out in the same law (the 1938 law). As highlighted by the Federal Finance Court, the tax exemptions alone are not justified by any ‘economic or socio-political reason’, they merely are the ‘necessary consequence’ of the existence of the special taxes applicable to public casinos operators.
2.3. Grounds for initiating the formal investigation procedure
(40) In the opening decision, the Commission preliminarily considered that measure 5 and the ad hoc decisions of the public authorities to reduce the special taxes applicable to the public casinos operators in certain cases (measure 2.b and measure 4.c) could involve State aid.
(41) Regarding measure 5, the Commission in particular stressed that ‘a mere (abstract) comparison of the legal features of the two systems (namely on the one hand the normal rules generally applicable to all companies and on the other hand the special tax rules generally applicable to public casinos operators) is not straight forward because the tax system of the public casinos operators is, in all Länder, fundamentally different from the normal tax rules which it is deemed to replace’ (recital (85) of the opening decision).
(42) The Commission however also considered that, ‘because a specific group of operators is subject to a special tax regime, it is however also not possible to rule out the existence of an advantage, in the absence of a general provision (such as a claw-back or offsetting mechanism (29)) automatically preventing that an advantage arises from the different tax rules. The absence of a mechanism ensuring that the special tax regime applicable to public casinos operators is not more advantageous compared to the normal tax rules means that this regime involves potentially an advantage for these operators. Also, the fact that the rates of the special tax (casino tax and additional taxes) paid by the public casinos operators decreased in the period under review […] constitutes an indication that the schemes at stake could, following that change, provide advantages’ (recital (90) of the opening decision).
(43) The Commission thus concluded that it ‘needs to examine, in the context of the formal investigation, whether public casinos operators enjoyed an advantage because of their subjection to special tax rules as of 8 March 2007’ (recital (101) of the opening decision).
(44) Regarding measure 2.b and measure 4.c, the ad hoc reductions of the special taxes applicable to public casinos operators, the Commission noted that ‘whether these specific measures provided the public casinos operators concerned with a selective advantage cannot, for the reasons mentioned in recital (126) [of the opening decision], be assessed standalone’ and that ‘they need to be examined using the same method as for measure 5 (global comparison), but that comparison should take place in a second step’ (recitals (137) and (138) of the opening decision), before concluding that they could constitute State aid (recital (141) of the opening decision).
(45) As regards all measures referred to in the preceding recitals, the Commission also raised doubts as to the compatibility of such measures (if aid) with the internal market. These measures would indeed ‘qualify as operating aid, as they are not linked to any specific investment or project. Operating aid that merely diminishes the normal costs of an undertaking distorts competition and it is a priori doubtful that such aid could be regarded as compatible with the internal market’ (recital (146) of the opening decision).
3. COMMENTS RECEIVED DURING THE FORMAL INVESTIGATION PROCEDURE
3.1. Comments by the German authorities
3.1.1. Comments by the federal authorities
3.1.1.1. Undertakings
(46) The German federal authorities submit that public casinos operators are not active in a market. Gambling is organised in such a way in Germany that offering table games is in principle forbidden. Only public casinos operators may offer such games, on the basis of a concession. Public casinos operators are entrusted with a public task, namely to offer gambling under State supervision in order to channel the gambling instinct of the population by means of a legal offer. The regional legal setup sometimes lays down that only the Land or public law entities can operate public casinos. The German Constitutional court considers that the operation of public casinos is not an economic activity (wirtschaftlicher Vorgang).
3.1.1.2. Advantage
(47) The German federal authorities submit that there are no ‘normal market conditions’ for public casinos operators, which enjoy a monopoly, and hence there is no reference (Prüfungsmaßstab) on the basis of which one could identify an advantage. The reference cannot be the normal tax rules because this is a matter of selectivity which is a specific and autonomous criterion. Moreover, because public casinos operators are subject to a special tax system, their taxation cannot be compared to the normal tax rules and thus they cannot receive an advantage.
(48) The German federal authorities submit that, even if the reference is the normal tax rules, the Commission cannot rely on a lack of a claw-back mechanism in the special tax rules (and a mere possibility of an advantage) to conclude that the special tax rules are advantageous. They consider that the judgment of the Court of Justice of the European Union (‘the Court of Justice’) in case C-81/10 P France Télécom SA v European Commission (30) is not relevant in this case because France Telecom was subject to the normal tax rules (except for specific aspects).
(49) The German federal authorities also submit that the second objective of the special tax rules applicable to public casinos operators is not to tax the latter the same as (or more than) under the normal tax rules but merely to cream off their profit until the economic viability limit is reached (Wirtschaftlichkeitsgrenze). The second objective would allow a lower level of (special) taxation in cases where the profit is low (but it would not force the legislator to safeguard an existing public casino in order to safeguard the public task it carries out). The concept of replacement (Abgeltung) is not to be understood in quantitative terms but in qualitative terms. Thus, Germany submits that the Commission would rely on a wrong assumption when it argues in the opening decision that the reduction of the casino tax below the initially chosen level of 80 % would imply that the special system does not achieve its aim anymore.
(50) The German federal authorities explain that all measures covered by the formal investigation are consistent with the objective of the special tax system to cream off profits until the economic viability limit (Wirtschaftlichkeitsgrenze). The ad hoc reductions are meant to prevent a taxation going beyond the economic viability limit.
3.1.1.3. Selectivity
(51) Concerning the first step of the selectivity test (identification of the reference system), the German federal authorities argue that there is no single or uniform reference tax system to which public casinos operators and commercial gambling halls operators would be subject. Public casinos operators are an exception (Ausnahmeerscheinung); they have their own specific tax system and there is no reference framework (except for VAT which is harmonised at Union level) from which this specific tax system would derogate. According to the case-law of the Union courts, the normal tax rules can only be the reference system for persons to which those rules would in principle apply. Public casinos operators are legally and factually very different from operators of commercial gambling halls, mainly because the former carry out a public task while the latter carry out an economic activity (wirtschaftliche Tätigkeit).
(52) Concerning the second step of the selectivity test (derogation), the German federal authorities submit that the two different tax systems (normal vs specific) have different objectives. The normal tax rules aim at generating revenue without obligation as to the use of the revenue. By contrast, the creamed off profits under the special tax rules are meant to benefit charitable purposes.
(53) Concerning the third step of the selectivity test (justification), the German federal authorities state that no justification for a prima facie selective measure can be provided in cases such as the one at stake where there is no common reference system. At the same time, there are similarities between the two tax systems, in particular the common principle of prevention of double taxation or excessive taxation. Thus, if there were only one common reference system (and the tax treatment of public casinos operators would be prima facie selective), the principle of prevention of excessive taxation should be taken into account.
(54) The German federal authorities consider that the special tax system applicable to the public casinos operators is the relevant reference system and there would therefore be no derogation. The German federal authorities, however, disagree that the objective of that special tax system is to reach at least the tax burden that would result from the normal tax rules, thus a possible advantage granted by the special tax rules would not run contrary to the logic of these special tax rules. In this context, should the Commission assess the coherence/consistency of the design of that separate reference framework in the light of the judgment of the Court of Justice in the case Commission and Spain v Government of Gibraltar and United Kingdom (31), the German federal authorities consider that the special tax rules are consistent with their objective and are not selective by design.
(55) The German federal authorities consider that the ad hoc reductions are a part of the special tax rules and pursue the objective of prevention of excessive taxation which is one of the objectives of the special tax rules.
3.1.1.4. Effect on trade and distortion of competition
(56) The German federal authorities argue that there is no effect on trade because the effects of the measures are purely local and do not have more than marginal effects on cross-border investments or cross-border establishment. Because of the geographic location of most of the public casinos, it is also unlikely that clients from other Member States would travel to the German public casinos only to play there. The German federal authorities argue that public casinos located close to the border are a minority of cases and should therefore be disregarded. In addition, only the existence of a public casino as such (and not its level of taxation) is relevant to assess whether there is an effect on trade because taxation is not harmonised at Union level.
(57) The German federal authorities submit that the special tax rules cannot lead to an (even potential) distortion of competition because the operation of public casinos is a monopoly as referred to in paragraph 188 of the Commission Notice on the notion of State aid (32). Undertakings from other Member States cannot enter the German market because the freedom of establishment does not grant a right to obtain the concession required to operate a casino, not because of the special tax rules. In addition, there are significant differences between the games offered by public casinos and the games offered by commercial gambling halls. Casino games can only be offered by public casinos, are in principle prohibited and are characterised by high personnel costs (labour expenditure). Gambling machines operated by public casinos and by commercial gambling halls are subject to different regulations: only the machines operated by commercial gambling halls are subject to a variety of restrictions and, in particular, have to comply with technical regulations preventing the possibility of unreasonably high losses in short periods of time. On the other hand, access to public casinos is restricted (entrance controls, limited number of public casinos per Land) while commercial gambling halls offer their services to a broader clientele.
3.1.1.5. Existing or new aid
(58) As regards national taxes, the German federal authorities argue that the exemption from national taxes was already laid down in the 1938 law and should be regarded as an existing measure, irrespective of the regulatory actions (tax measures) adopted by the Länder after 1958. The fact that the tax exemption was not used before 1958 in certain Länder (because no public casinos were opened in certain Länder) is irrelevant.
(59) For the German federal authorities, considering, as the Commission does, the exemption from national taxes not to be existing aid is contradictory to the case-law about regional selectivity, as detailed in paragraph 144 of the Commission Notice on the notion of State aid. Even if the special tax systems laid down at regional level could be regarded as derogations from the normal tax rules (which Germany contests), these derogations would be attributable to the German Länder which are autonomous.
(60) The German federal authorities also submit that the exemption from the solidarity surcharge is not a new measure because it was already covered by the 1938 law (as any other, even future, surcharge). Also, the surcharge is calculated on the basis of the amount of corporate or income tax due and as there is a corporate or income tax exemption, it is thus impossible to calculate the amount of the surcharge.
(61) As regards Länder (and municipal) taxes, the German federal authorities consider that the exemptions from Länder taxes are existing measures irrespective of their adoption date, because the legal basis for those exemptions was laid down in the 1938 law and the general principles of taxation of the public casinos (taxation until the limit of economic viability or Wirtschaftlichkeitsgrenze) were also already laid down in the 1938 law. The legislator in 1938 could not list all the different Länder taxes. Article 6(2) of the 1938 law also covers future Länder taxes. The 1938 law does not impose exemptions from Länder and municipal taxes; these were only laid down when required, that is when a public casino was created in the Land, which sometimes happened only after 1958; but the exemption always results from the 1938 law.
(62) As regards the ad hoc reductions of the special taxes (measures 2.b and 4.c), the German federal authorities consider that these measures are not selective because they result from the general principles of taxation of public casinos. Because those principles were laid down in the 1938 law and because the ad hoc measures directly stem from those principles, the ad hoc measures are, even if they were introduced after 1958, also not new measures.
(63) As regards the legal reductions of the special taxes and the temporary automatic legal reductions of the special taxes under certain circumstances (measures 2.a and 4.b), the German federal authorities consider that those measures do not provide a selective advantage. They are consistent with the general principles of taxation of public casinos.
3.1.1.6. Compatibility
(64) The German federal authorities submit that the measures at stake (the special tax schemes applicable to public casinos operators) pursue an objective of general interest (they refer to the reasoning made in other sections of their comments), are necessary, appropriate and proportionate.
3.1.2. Comments by the Land Baden-Württemberg
(65) Apart from factual clarifications on the special tax treatment in the Land, Baden-Württemberg submits that, even though the tax exemption was only and specifically granted to Spielbank Baden-Baden GmbH & Co. KG, this was the only public casinos operator before 1958 in the Land and thus de facto all operators were tax exempted at that time.
3.1.3. Comments by the Land Bavaria
(66) Bavaria argues that the documents provided to the Commission show that the trade tax exemption was granted before 1958 by an indefinite number of communes to an indefinite number of public casinos operators and thus would, in theory, cover all operators in that Land.
(67) Bavaria also submits that the trade tax exemption results from Article 6(1) of the 1938 law and would thus date back directly to that law.
3.1.4. Comments by the Land Hamburg
(68) As regards the existence of State aid, Hamburg argues that the catering activities of the public casinos operators should not be taken into account to qualify those operators as undertakings or not. Hamburg also explains that online gambling is prohibited in Germany so that (illegal) online gambling is not in competition with the services provided by public casinos operators. Hamburg recalls that, as the choice of the public casinos operator in the Land was organised through a tender open to any operator in Europe; there was no tax obstacle for foreign operators.
(69) As regards the qualification of the special tax scheme in that Land as existing or new, Hamburg submits that the casino tax rate was not reduced because the rate can still reach 90 % of the GGI. Hamburg also explains that, in any event, no proper comparison (between normal tax rules and special tax rules) can be carried out, in particular because the operator would have had behaved differently if it had been subject to another tax system.
3.1.5. Comments by the Land Rheinland-Palatinate
3.1.5.1. Ad hoc reductions (measures 2.b and 4.c)
(70) Rhineland-Palatinate explains that the ad hoc reductions of the casino tax were justified in the light of the principles laid down in the 1933 law and are necessary to safeguard the viability of the public task carried out by the operator.
3.1.5.2. Existing aid
(71) Rhineland-Palatinate submits that the corporate tax and income tax rates were reduced in parallel to the decrease of the casino tax. The evolution in time of the entertainment tax cannot be precisely described. The trade tax increased over time. These contradictory evolutions show that no obvious trend can be found as regards normal taxes. The introduction in the Land of a special tax on profit is a timely adaptation of the special tax rules and does not constitute a fundamental change of the special tax rules.
(72) Rhineland-Palatinate submits that, even though the tax exemption was only and specifically granted to the Spielbank in Bad Neuenahr, this was the only public casinos operator before 1958 in that city and thus there was no need to lay down a general exemption. Rhineland-Palatinate also considers that the exemption from communal taxes did not expire because it was regularly renewed.
(73) Regarding the Spielbank in Bad Dürkheim, the Land submits that it never paid any municipal taxes before the entry into force of the TFEU (33) and that this fact shows that there must have been a tax exemption.
3.2. Comments by public casinos operators
3.2.1. Comments by Spielbank Bad Homburg Wicker & Co. KG (‘SBHW’), operator of the Spielbank Bad Homburg until 2012 (25 March 2020)
(74) SBHW submits that the concession contract to operate the public casino entailed various obligations (investment in immovable assets, etc.) which had, together with other regulatory features (smoking ban), a negative impact on the profitability of the business. The ad hoc reductions of the special taxes were necessary to survive and had to be justified to the tax authorities. SBHW paid much more taxes than commercial gambling halls. Public casinos are not in competition with private commercial gambling halls because of legal differences mentioned by the German federal authorities.
3.2.2. Comment by the European Casino Association (‘ECA’) (3 July 2020)
(75) The ECA explains that there are many regulatory differences between public casinos and commercial gambling halls (Spielhallen).
3.2.2.1. Advantage
(76) The ECA submits that a tax advantage would merely constitute compensation from the State for the services of general economic interest provided by the German public casinos. The casinos have been entrusted by the Länder with the public task of curbing illegal gambling and providing state-monitored opportunities to satisfy the irrepressible human need to gamble. Public casinos operators are subject to various regulatory restrictions (legal form, need to have a licence, blacklist of addicted players) while commercial gambling halls operator can choose their legal form.
3.2.2.2. Distortion of competition
(77) For the ECA, the relevant product market for the determination of threats of distortion of competition is the market for the operation of public casinos. The Commission should first define the relevant product market and cannot simply make unsubstantiated assertions that casino operators compete with amusement arcade operators and with other companies in the broader entertainment market. This contradicts the Commission’s prior decisional practice, according to which there is no uniform market for gambling (Commission Non-opposition decision of 4 June 2004, Comp/M.3373, Point 26 et seq). Table games and slot machines gambling offered by casinos are completely different from commercial slot machines gambling offered in amusement arcades.
3.2.2.3. Effect on trade
(78) According to the ECA, the operation of casinos is legally restricted to the respective Land and case-law rejects the possibility of a detrimental effect on trade between Member States in such cases (case T-728/17).
3.2.3. Comments by Spielbank Hamburg Jahr + Achterfeld GmbH & Co. KG, Spielbank Wiesbaden GmbH & Co. KG and Spielbanken Niedersachsen GmbH (‘SHSWSN’), operators of public casinos in Hamburg, Hesse and Niedersachsen (3 July 2020)
(79) SHSWSN generally submits that the Commission did not sufficiently take into account the factual and legal specificities of public casinos and their differences compared to gambling halls. According to German courts (Federal Administrative Court, BVerwG, 13.6.2013, 9 B 50/12, paragraph 6), these differences justify a differentiated tax treatment.
3.2.3.1. Undertaking
(80) Public casinos operators carry out a public task. The activity of public casinos forms part of essential functions of the State. There is an obligation to operate public casinos. This would be confirmed by judgments of the German constitutional court (BVerfG, 18.3.1970, 2 BvO 1/65, paragraph 97 f, BVerfG, 18.3.1970, 2 BvO 1/65, paragraph 99 and following). Because the economic aspects of the operation of public casinos are very limited (by comparison with the public policy objective of prevention of addiction), there is no real market for public casinos and this market is restricted to a few suppliers (and does not include commercial gambling halls, BVerfG, 19.7.2000, 1 BvR 539/96, paragraph 70 and 73). Public casinos must be economically operated but the economic aspect is ancillary and inseparable from the public remit activity (case C-138/11, paragraph 38). The existence of a price is not relevant.
3.2.3.2. Distortion of competition
(81) Because of the different legal framework, the Federal Constitutional Court considered that there are two different markets, one for public casinos (restricted to public casinos) and one for commercial gambling halls (BVerfG, 19.7.2000, 1 BvR 539/96, paragraph 70, 73). From the point of view of the players, the gambling offer of public casinos is different from the gambling offer of commercial gambling halls and both products are not interchangeable. The public casinos have not been able to detect migration from one type of gambling to another. The two tax systems pursue different objectives and cannot be compared.
(82) Any undertaking from an EU Member State can be granted the concession to operate a public casino. This is the case for the Austrian undertaking Casinos Austria International GmbH operating the public casinos in Niedersachsen.
(83) There is also no distortion of competition on the demand side (clients/players). Public casinos are the only suppliers of table games. The gambling machines operated by public casinos are also fundamentally different from the ones operated by commercial gambling halls.
3.2.3.3. Effect on trade
(84) The effect of the measure is restricted to the territory of each of the Länder as a consequence of the catchment area of the public casinos at stake. According to the Commission (COMP/M.3373 – Accor/Colony/Desseigne-Barriere/JV vom 4. Juni 2004, paragraph 23), players are ready to travel 30 minutes for gambling machines and 60 minutes for table games. Hamburg is 1h49min away from Denmark and 2h57min away from the next Danish casino. Wiesbaden is 2h01min away from Luxemburg and 2h30min away from the next Luxemburgish casino. Public casinos in Niedersachsen are between 0h11min and 3h17min away from the Netherlands and between 0h31min and 3h21min away from the next Dutch casino. Only a very limited number of players of German public casinos are nationals from other EU Member States, and it must be assumed that these players do not come to Germany to play casino games but for some other reasons.
3.2.3.4. Selectivity
(85) As regards the reference framework, SHSWSN submits that, except for VAT, the reference system chosen by the Commission (the tax law of undertakings, Unternehmenssteuerrecht) is wrong because it does not cover in principle public casinos operators. The tax law of public casinos (Spielbankensteuerrecht) is not an exception or a derogation from Unternehmenssteuerrecht, both are very different and autonomous tax systems and constitute two sets of general measures. Spielbankensteuerrecht thus rather constitutes its own reference system.
(86) The concept of regional selectivity is also only applicable in one tax system which covers the alleged beneficiary and its competitors. The area of responsibility of a regional institution (here a Land) located within a Member State forms an independent regional reference framework for the selectivity test if it has sufficient autonomy. In the hypothesis of symmetrical devolution of tax powers, the existence of different tax rates is not selective. The two tax systems are imputable to two different legislative competences (federal State and Länder): the only reference framework is the regional Spielbankensteuerrecht.
(87) As regards the second step of the selectivity test (comparability and derogation), if the reference system is the taxation of public casinos, there is no derogation. Differences of taxation of public casinos between different Länder is also irrelevant in the light of the regional selectivity reasoning. If one takes the normal taxation of undertakings as reference system, the taxation of public casinos is a derogation but public casinos and gambling halls are not in the same situation.
(88) Because the taxation of public casinos is not part of the reference system used by the Commission (general tax rules), it is impossible to provide a justification in the third step of the selectivity test. If one takes the taxation of public casinos as reference, there are possible justifications: public casinos need to be taxed only to the extent that they keep the ability to always carry out their public task; the prevention of excessive taxation could also be relevant.
3.2.3.5. Advantage
(89) The advantage needs to be calculated using the general taxes applicable in the relevant Länder and cities where public casinos are located. Such an abstract calculation is detrimental to the public casinos because they could not adapt to the normal tax rules. In any event, since 2007, there was no advantage for the public casinos in Hamburg, Wiesbaden and Niedersachsen. This shows that the gambling halls are advantaged.
3.2.3.6. Existing aid
(90) The tax exemptions, the (very limited) reductions of the casino tax and the VAT offsetting mechanism (and, more generally, some necessary flexibility in the setting of the tax rate in order to ensure that public casinos can carry out their public tasks) derive from the 1933 and 1938 laws. The objective and the political aim of the special tax rules have not changed. There were no significant modifications after 1958 or those changes would only be the concretization of possibilities existing before 1958. The existence of a public casino before 1958 is not relevant for the exemption from corporate tax and income tax. A reduction of the casino tax rate alone cannot be used to conclude that there has been a significant change in the system because the taxation (and the profit) of public casinos also depends on other features which cannot be calculated. The evolution of normal tax rules cannot transform unchanged special tax rules into new aid.
3.2.3.7. Compatibility
(91) The aid would be compatible following the same reasoning as the one in Commission Decision 2012/140/EU (‘the Decision of 20 September 2011’) (34) because the aid would aim at ensuring player protection.
3.2.3.8. Recovery
(92) Recovery should in this case be prohibited because it is contrary to the protection of legitimate expectations of the beneficiaries which always paid their taxes and because the special tax rules exist since 1938 and ordering recovery would endanger the public task carried out by public casinos.
3.2.4. Comments by François-Blanc-Spielbank GmbH (‘FBS’), operator of the public casino in Bad Homburg (Hessen) as from 2012 (4 July 2020)
(93) FBS argues that there is no competition between public casinos and commercial gambling halls and that the two tax systems are independent. A study by KPMG shows that the tax burden of FBS under the special tax rules is much higher than under the normal tax rules.
(94) FBS considers that the ad hoc reductions are also intrinsically linked with the generally applicable special tax rules laid down in the regional law of public casinos in Hesse. The possibility to reduce the special taxes is a correction mechanism required by the German Constitution in order to prevent excessive taxation (that can arise because the tax base of the special taxes is the GGI, not the profit, so that the principle of taxation on net income (Nettoprinzip) is not complied with under the special tax rules).
3.2.5. Comments by Spielbank Bad Neuenahr GmbH & Co. KG (‘SBN’), operator of public casinos (35) in Rhineland-Palatinate (31 July 2020)
3.2.5.1. Undertakings
(95) According to SBN, public casinos operators are not undertakings. The exclusion of competition via a legal monopoly does not as such exclude the existence of a market and thus the qualification as undertakings (case T-309/12, paragraph 68). However public casinos operators carry out public tasks: in the interest of the State, the casinos are entrusted with the public task of curbing illegal gambling and providing state-monitored opportunities for gambling. There is a public interest in allowing gambling to take place under state supervision. The fact that the operators provide their gambling services against remuneration (gegen Entgelt) does not make them undertakings because their profit is creamed off by their special tax rules. The German Federal Constitutional Court also acknowledged that public casinos operators do not carry out economic activities (BVerfGE 28, 119).
3.2.5.2. Advantage
(96) According to SBN, measure 5 (the special tax rules applicable to public casinos operators) does not provide an advantage. Even if one uses the (incorrect) method of the Commission (comparing the special tax rules and the normal tax rules), public casinos operators in Rhineland-Palatinate were subject to a much higher tax burden under their special tax rules in the period 2007 to 2017, so that the special tax rules rather constitute a disadvantage for the public casinos operators or an advantage to the commercial gambling halls (if one follows the views of the Commission that casinos and commercial gambling halls are comparable from a competition point of view).
(97) SBN submits that the measure at stake should be assessed using a full analysis of all relevant, positive and negative parameters of the measures and its context, including the situation of the beneficiary (case T-525/08, paragraph 57 and 60). But the Commission did not take into account the fact that the special tax rules are inextricably linked with the idea that risky gambling is only allowed by the State if carried out in a responsible environment.
(98) For SBN (referring to the heading 3.1.4 of the opening decision), the Commission unduly merged the two criteria of advantage and selectivity.
(99) SBN submits that comparing the special tax rules and the normal tax rules is not the correct method to establish the existence of an advantage in this case because the two tax systems are very different, as the Commission itself acknowledged in its abstract comparison. A concrete comparison is also not the correct method because there are no normal market conditions for public casinos operators (case C-15/14, paragraph 77-79). The reference to assess the existence of an advantage should be found in national tax legislation and should take into account the objective of the tax system. While the normal tax rules pursue a revenue-raising objective, the special tax system applicable to public casinos primarily pursues regulatory purposes. The skimming (Abschöpfung) objective does not mean that the special tax rules will always lead to a disadvantage. It means that, if profit is low, the tax burden can be lower than under the normal tax rules, in order to allow the operator to carry out its public task. But, of course, public casinos are not to be preserved at any cost.
(100) SBN considers that the lack of claw back mechanism is not relevant because the objective of the special tax rules allow – in certain cases – a lower taxation to safeguard the public tasks carried out by the public casinos. The reduction of the casino tax rate in Rhineland-Palatinate was justified by the negative evolution of the public casinos operators’ turnover, their increasing costs, and by the need to take into account their ability to pay as is the case under the normal tax rules. It was meant to safeguard the public tasks carried out by these operators.
3.2.5.3. Selectivity
(101) SBN considers that the special tax system is its own reference framework as it is very different from the normal tax rules and pursues a regulatory objective. The German legislator had no intention to advantage public casinos operators when it designed the normal tax rules. The Court of Justice also considers that the reference system is the rules that as such would be applicable to the undertakings at stake. The national corporate tax rules are not always the reference (case C-88/03, paragraph 59).
(102) SBN argues that since the special tax system is the correct reference system, the special tax rules are not selective. Public casinos operators are in a specific situation in the light of the regulatory objective pursued by the special tax rules.
(103) SBN also considers that the aim of the special tax rules is not automatically to lead to a higher tax burden, as these rules can lead to under-taxation in certain cases (low profit, establishment phase). Any selectivity of the measures at stake would be justified by the tax law principle prohibiting excessive taxation.
(104) SBN submits that also measures 2.b and 4.c are not selective because they are covered by the objective of the special tax rules to tax public casinos operators only until the economic viability limits (Wirtschaftlichkeitsgrenze). The ad hoc decisions to reduce the special taxes are targeted measures for reasons of equity and to prevent hardships and which are meant to keep the casinos viable. A private operator would also have granted such a measure to keep the casinos alive because it would not have wanted to act against the regulatory purpose of offering regulated access to risky games in public casinos.
3.2.5.4. Distortion of competition and effect on trade
(105) SBN submits that public casinos operators have a monopoly. Operators of regular gambling machines such as commercial gambling halls may be in competition with public casinos operators to the extent they all offer games of chance but this is not sufficient for State aid purposes. The interchangeability of the products by reason of the products’ characteristics, their prices and their intended use is decisive. But the two products at stake are different.
(106) SBN also argues that the public casinos operators’ activities are purely local activities. In the period 2007 to 2017, the proportion of foreign players was within a range of 3,22 % and 6,34 % for the casino in Bad Neuenahr and within a range of 1,63 % und 3,32 % for the casino in Bad Dürkheim. Players interested in table games would travel from a distance of 50 to 100 km while clients interested in casinos’ gambling machines would travel from a distance of 30 to 50 km.
3.2.5.5. Compatibility
(107) SBN considers that the measures at stake, if aid, would be compatible under Article 107(3), point (b), TFEU. They pursue an objective of general interest, namely to limit the risks of gambling. They are necessary, proportionate and appropriate because they do not cause distortions of competition.
3.2.5.6. Existing aid
(108) The measures at stake are, according to SBN, existing measures because they are based on Article 6 of the 1938 law. Subsequent changes did not change the core of that provision and were inherent to the system.
3.3. Comments by the complainants (5 August 2020)
3.3.1. Regarding measure 5
(109) The complainants contest the method and the outcome of the concrete comparison mentioned by the Commission in recital (95) and following of the opening decision.
(110) The complainants further argue that the gambling machines operated by public casinos, which are more dangerous from the perspective of player protection (according to the Bundeszentrale für gesundheitliche Aufklärung (36)), should a fortiori be subject to the entertainment tax, given that the gambling machines operated by gambling halls are subject to this tax while being less dangerous.
(111) The complainants also argue, in the context of measure 3, that the profit-skimming (Gewinnabschöpfung) laid down by the regional law on public casinos in North Rhine-Westphalia is not a tax and should not be taken into account in the tax burden under the special tax rules. They submit that only the German law is relevant to qualify a measure as a tax and that the profit-skimming does not actually pursue the aims of the special tax system applicable to public casinos (i.e. Abgeltung and Abschöpfung).
3.3.2. Regarding measure 1 (VAT offsetting mechanism)
(112) The complainants consider that the Commission did not clarify certain aspects of the VAT offsetting mechanism. For the complainants, the Commission failed to examine their argument that the obligation to pay VAT had no economic consequence for the public casinos. It is also still unclear whether public casinos use the right to deduct input VAT even though this is not necessary since, even if they did not use that right, they would save the amount of input tax through a reduction of the casino tax. Some revenues of the public casinos (such as entrance fees) are not taxed at all, which the Commission should investigate.
3.4. Comments by the German federal authorities on the comments submitted by third parties (17 September 2020)
(113) The German federal authorities consider that the fight against gambling addiction is pursued through the regulatory framework of the public casinos, not through the taxation. Thus an additional taxation of public casinos under entertainment tax is not necessary. They contest the view of the complainants that the profit-skimming in North Rhine-Westphalia is not a tax. The profit-skimming is a tax following the relevant provision of the tax ordinance (Abgabenordnung, see Article 3(1) of that ordinance).
(114) The German authorities consider that the comments made by the ECA mainly support their own position but stress again that the normal tax rules do not constitute the reference for the taxation of public casinos.
(115) They also mostly agree with the comments submitted by the public casinos operators.
4. ASSESSMENT OF THE MEASURES
4.1. The measures
(116) According to the case-law of the Court of Justice, several interventions of the State must be regarded as a ‘single intervention’ in particular when ‘having regard to their chronology, their purpose and the circumstances of the undertaking at the time of those interventions’, they are so closely linked to each other that they are ‘inseparable’ from one another (37). The Commission has a duty to consider complex measures in their entirety in order to determine whether they confer on the recipient undertaking an economic advantage which it would not have obtained under normal market conditions (38). When a public intervention entails different (positive and negative) consequences for an undertaking, the Commission must take into account the cumulative effect of these consequences to assess the existence of an advantage (39).
(117) In that regard, as explained in Section 2.2.3, both the special taxes applicable to the public casinos operators and the exemptions from normal taxes are of the same nature (tax measures, see recital (158)). They are, in each Land, the two non-severable parts or components of one complex measure (one per Land) and are therefore assessed together. The special tax rules applicable to the public casinos operators are defined in each Land and include also the reductions of the casino tax and of other special taxes.
(118) This Decision concerns the 16 special tax schemes applicable to public casinos operators in the 16 Länder (40) (‘the measures’), encompassing in each Land:
(a)
the overall special tax treatment generally applicable to public casinos operators operating in that Land including a positive aspect (the special taxes imposed on public casinos operators) and a negative aspect (the exemptions from normally applicable taxes) (measure 5). This special tax treatment also includes the generally applicable reductions of the special taxes imposed on the public casinos operators, which are automatic and laid down in laws of the Länder, namely the reduction of the casino tax to offset the VAT (measure 1) and, if any, the reduction of the casino tax in the case of new public casinos’ openings (measure 2.a) and/or in other circumstances (measure 4.b); and
(b)
the ad hoc decisions of the public authorities to reduce the special taxes applicable to certain public casinos operators, if any (measure 2.b and measure 4.c). These reductions are intrinsically linked with the special tax treatment applicable to the public casinos operators and must therefore be assessed as part of the 16 schemes. Formally, the legal basis to provide such reductions is indeed laid down in the same law of the Länder as the one laying down the other features of the special tax treatment. More substantially, these ad hoc reductions cannot be assessed on their own because they merely reduce the tax burden arising from the special tax rules, without it being possible to determine whether these ad hoc reductions as such provide an advantage compared to the normal tax rules (see recital (137) of the opening decision). Furthermore, in order to adapt the tax burden of the public casinos operators, it is a mere formal choice of the public authorities of the Länder to choose between a direct change to the scheme, i.e. of the tax features laid down in the law on public casinos, or a reduction of the tax burden through the adoption of ad hoc measures. Germany also underlined that the ad hoc measures followed the same overall objective as the special tax treatment.
(119) As regards the VAT offsetting mechanisms, the opening decision noted that public casinos operators have been subject to VAT since 2006 (recital (123) of the opening decision), while before 2006 they were formally exempted from VAT but the casino tax they paid was meant to replace all normal taxes, including VAT (footnote 66 of the opening decision). It was also noted that the VAT offsetting mechanisms could not be assessed in isolation from VAT obligations of the public casinos operators, leading to the finding that the 2006 reform encompassing both items was neutral (recitals (124) and (125) of the opening decision). As a consequence, the 2006 reform may only have maintained an existing advantage related to the special tax rules to which public casinos operators are subject, an issue included in the assessment of measure 5 on which the Commission opened the formal investigation procedure. Finally, the opening decision noted that focussing on the VAT offsetting mechanism in isolation from the related VAT obligation of public casinos did not allow a finding of an advantage as those mechanisms merely reduced the level of special taxes, without any reference to the relevant benchmark which are the normal tax rules (recital (126) of the opening decision).
4.2. Existence of State aid
(120) According to Article 107(1)TFEU, ‘any aid granted by a Member State or through State resources in any form whatsoever which distorts or threatens to distort competition by favouring certain undertakings or the production of certain goods shall, in so far as it affects trade between Member States, be incompatible with the internal market.’
(121) The qualification of a measure as aid within the meaning of Article 107(1) TFEU requires the following cumulative conditions to be met: (i) the measure must be imputable to the State and financed through State resources; (ii) it must confer an advantage to an undertaking; (iii) that advantage must be selective; and (iv) the measure must distort or threaten to distort competition and affect trade between Member States.
4.2.1. State resources and imputability to the State
(122) To constitute State aid, a measure must both be imputable to the State and financed through State resources.
(123) The measures are tax measures, imputable to a public authority (central State/Länder/municipalities, see Section 2.2). They also involve public resources, to the extent the public authorities that collect these taxes forego revenues, which they would otherwise collect from an undertaking in normal circumstances (41).
4.2.2. Undertakings
(124) The German public casinos offer services (especially gambling services and gambling related services (42)) against remuneration (entrance fees, a fraction of the bets served in the form of winnings, prices), which is not contested by Germany or the public casinos operators (43). They offer those services on a market (see Section 4.2.3 about distortion of competition). They are thus undertakings carrying out economic activities for State aid purposes.
(125) The fact that national law or national courts would not have regarded public casinos’ gambling activities as economic activities is not relevant, to the extent this qualification was not carried out in the light of Article 107(1) TFEU (44). Judgments of German courts issued in other contexts made different findings; for instance, the German Federal Constitutional Court also found that the operation of a public casino is without doubt ‘profit-oriented’ and that public casino operators are undertakers/undertakings (Unternehmer) (45); in another judgment, the same tribunal qualified the operation of public casinos as a mere ‘occupation/profession’ (46). In the same vein, public casinos operators would be subject to trade tax (if they were not exempted), while this tax only applies to ‘business enterprises’ and entities carrying out an ‘economic business’ (47). In addition, gambling operators are in principle taxable persons for VAT purposes according to Council Directive 2006/112/EC (48). Furthermore, in a number of Länder, public casinos operators are regular private-law undertakings owned by private owners.
(126) The Commission already considered that gambling activities (and in particular the activities of casinos) are economic activities pursuant to Article 107(1) TFEU (49).
(127) The alleged fact that public casinos operators are not active ‘on a market’ (because gambling is prohibited in Germany and because only public casinos operators are allowed to offer the games they provide) will be examined (and rebutted) in Section 4.2.3 about distortion of competition. It is also sufficient to note that the alleged exclusion of competition via a legal monopoly does not as such exclude the existence of a market and thus the qualification as undertaking (50).
(128) Germany and certain public casinos operators broadly (51) argue that public casinos operators are entrusted with the public task of offering gambling under State supervision in order to channel the gambling instinct of the population by means of a legal offer. Public casinos operators would perform essential function of the State and carrying out their activities would be mandatory. The Court of Justice however only regarded a few activities as being non-economic in nature and essential functions of the State (police, air navigation safety or the organisation, financing and enforcement of prison sentences); providing gambling services is not part of them. In addition, at least in a number of Länder, public casinos operators are private-law undertakings and are not necessarily owned by the public authorities (52), which shows that the activities at stake are not essential functions of the State (or of the public authorities in general). Moreover, in certain Länder, public casinos operators went bankrupt (see recital (144) of the opening decision) and there were no public casinos in certain Länder for several years (Thuringia, Mecklenburg-Vorpommern). This shows that providing gambling services is not an obligation of the public authorities and that the legal offer (meant to channel the gambling instinct of the population) described by Germany was inexistent in those cases. Gambling services of public casinos operators being sometimes not provided or not to be provided at any cost, it cannot be argued that those activities are ‘essential functions of the State’ (53). It may be true that the public authorities’ (Länder) activity to regulate gambling in public casinos in each Land is an essential function of the public authorities (54). However, this activity of the Länder is different from the activity of providing gambling services by public casinos operators as such. The mere fact that an economic activity is regulated by the public authorities does not prevent it from being qualified as economic activity. This is confirmed by the German courts (55).
4.2.3. Distortion of competition
(129) A measure granted by the State is considered to distort or threaten to distort competition when it is liable to improve the competitive position of the recipient compared to other undertakings with which it competes (56). A distortion of competition is generally found to exist when the State grants a financial advantage to an undertaking in a liberalised sector where there is, or could be, competition (57). Public support is liable to distort competition even if it does not help the recipient undertaking to expand and gain market share. It is enough that the aid allows it to maintain a stronger competitive position than it would have had if the aid had not been provided.
(130) When the Commission assesses aid schemes, it does not need to check that the criterion of distortion of competition is actually met in all individual cases, for all beneficiaries of the scheme.
(131) The measures are liable to distort competition.
(132) Such measures indeed favour certain economic operators over their competitors in a market where at least some competition exists or can exist. The fact that the public casinos operators would benefit from a legal monopoly to provide the games they offer does not alter that finding. The games they offer are at least to a certain extent in competition with the ones offered by other operators, even if they are not exactly the same. In particular, public casinos operators are to some extent in competition with gambling halls (in particular as regards gambling machines) and with other undertakings in the broad market of games of chance and the broader market of entertainment. Even for table games, public casinos operators are to some extent in competition with gambling halls, online operators and casinos from other Member States.
(133) The market at stake is not limited to gambling in German public casinos. Even though, as argued by the German authorities, the games offered in public casinos can only be offered in Germany by public casinos (legal monopoly), and even though the gambling machines operated by the public casinos operators and by the commercial gambling halls are not exactly the same (see recital (13)), public casinos operators are to a certain extent in competition with commercial gambling halls, in particular when they offer gambling machines and provide related services. This is evidenced by consistent and repeated statements by public casinos operators themselves and their business association (58), by judgments of the German courts (59) and by reports of other German public institutions (60).
(134) One public casino operator (SBN) acknowledges in its comments that operators of regular gambling machines such as commercial gambling halls may be in competition with public casinos operators to the extent they all offer games of chance. But it argues, on the basis of the Commission Notice on the definition of relevant market for the purposes of Community competition law (61), that such a ‘competition relationship’ is not sufficient for State aid purposes: the interchangeability of the products by reason of the products’ characteristics, their prices and their intended use would be decisive. The Commission Notice however explicitly acknowledges that ‘elements of the approach outlined here might serve as a basis for the assessment of State aid cases’ only ‘when consideration of market power and therefore of the relevant market are raised’, which is not the case here. On the contrary, it is in general not relevant (and it is not necessary) to define a ‘market’ in terms of product substitutability in State aid cases (62).
(135) The alleged fact that gambling halls and public casinos would operate on different markets according to the Commission’s own decisional practice is irrelevant and wrong. The Commission Decision mentioned by ECA is a merger decision, not a State aid decision. In addition, even if that decision left open the question whether gambling machines and table games were in the same market (for mergers purposes), it explicitly stated that the Commission already acknowledged that there was one market for gambling machines (63) and it is not contested that both gambling halls and public casinos operate gambling machines (these represent around 75 % and up to 100 % of the public casinos’ total gambling turnover).
(136) Some public casinos operators (and the German association of public casinos itself) even consider that public casinos are in competition with operators providing other game of chances than gambling machines (such as sports betting) and even with operators providing leisure activities in general (64).
(137) Public casinos operators are also at least to a certain extent in competition with online gambling operators offering casino games or other games of chance (65). Even though certain public casinos operators argued that online gambling was illegal in Germany, the legal basis they refer to provides for certain exceptions (66) and online gambling became legal in 2021 (67).
(138) In addition, even if one considers that casino games are only in competition with casino games (which the Commission contests), there is to a certain extent competition between German public casinos themselves (68) and between German public casinos and foreign casinos (69).
(139) As the services provided by public casinos operators are in competition with other services, paragraph 188 of the Commission Notice on the notion of State aid (legal monopoly) is not applicable.
(140) In the light of the above, the measures are liable to distort or threaten to distort competition.
4.2.4. Effect on intra-Union trade
(141) According to well-established case-law of the Court of Justice, it is not necessary to demonstrate that an aid has an actual effect on trade between Member States, but only that it is liable to affect such trade (70). In particular, the Court of Justice has ruled that where State aid ‘strengthens the position of an undertaking as compared with other undertakings competing in intra-[Union] trade, the latter must be regarded as affected by the aid’ (71).
(142) Furthermore, public support can have an effect on trade between Member States even if the recipient is not directly involved in cross-border trade. A subsidy may for example make it more difficult for operators in other Member States to enter the market (72). Even a subsidy provided to an undertaking that provides only local or regional services may have an effect on trade where undertakings from other Member States could provide such services (also using the freedom of establishment) and the possibility is not purely hypothetical (73).
(143) The measures are liable to affect intra-Union trade.
(144) When the Commission assesses aid schemes, it does not need to check that the criterion of effect on trade is actually met in all individual cases, for all beneficiaries of the scheme and whatever the amounts of aid at stake. In that regard, it is sufficient to note that (i) public casinos and gambling halls are at least to some extent in competition, (ii) nothing prevents public casinos and commercial gambling halls from being operated close to each other (in the same city for example) and this is often factually the case, and (iii) nothing prevents such gambling halls from being operated or owned by foreign undertakings. Thus, a selective advantage to public casinos is liable to affect intra-Union trade by making it more difficult for companies from other Member States to enter the market and operate gambling halls in Germany.
(145) As a matter of fact, many gambling halls in Germany are operated by foreign undertakings (74). Furthermore, it is not contested that, in fact, at least one of the public casinos operated by each public casinos operator is located close to one or several commercial gambling halls which are or could be operated by undertakings from other Member States.
(146) An advantage for public casinos operators is also such as to help them to attract foreign customers, especially in border regions. Attracting foreign customers (not only in border regions but more generally in all cities with a public casinos, for instance spa cities of international reputation) was historically one of the aims of the 1933 law allowing the operation of public casinos (75). Still today, public casinos are mostly located in places attracting foreign customers (76) such as major cities, touristic cities, airports (77) or border regions.
(147) Using their strengthened financial situation, public casinos operators can also more easily enter foreign markets (78) or attract foreign investment (79).
(148) The German federal authorities and some public casinos operators argue that the effects of the measures are purely local and do not have more than marginal effects on cross-border investments or cross-border establishment. They explain in that regard that, because of the geographic location of most of the public casinos, it is unlikely that clients from other Member States would travel to the German public casinos only to play there (public casinos located close to the border are a minority of cases that should be ignored). This line of reasoning is however not relevant when aid schemes are at stake, in particular when such schemes are not legally restricted to cases in which their effects would be purely local and would not have more than marginal effects on cross-border investments or cross-border establishment. In addition, whether or not clients from other Member States would travel to the German public casinos only to play there is not the relevant criterion: what matters is whether or not the increased attractiveness of German public casinos is liable to (even marginally) influence foreign customers’ behaviour. Furthermore, one of the main effects on intra-Union trade in this case concerns the limitation to the establishment and operation of gambling halls by foreign operators, while these gambling halls are (as explained in recital (145)) or at least can be operated close to public casinos. In that context pointing to an effect on trade, Germany and the relevant public casinos operators do not explain how the measures could not have an impact on cross-border investments or cross-border establishment.
(149) Germany and the public casinos operators in question rather merely focus on the impact of the measures on consumers or on other casinos. The public casinos operators in Hamburg, Wiesbaden (in Hesse) and Lower Saxony only submitted information about the distance between their casinos and the next border or the next foreign casino (80). In the same vein, the operator of the public casinos in Bad Neuenahr and Bad Dürkheim (in Rhineland-Palatinate) merely submitted that the proportion of foreign players would range from 1 % to 6 % (81).
(150) Given the characteristics of the measures, the aid schemes as such are liable to affect trade between Member States. Moreover in the light of the possible effect on foreign investment/establishment in gambling halls (and in public casinos, when it is legally possible (82)), it is likely that all the individual aids granted under the schemes have more than marginal effects on trade. It is not a priori excluded to find individual situations where the aid has no effect on trade (83). However, the identification of such situations belongs to the implementation phase.
(151) Consequently, it is considered that the measures are liable to have an effect on intra-Union trade.
4.2.5. Selective advantage
(152) To assess the existence of an advantage, the financial situation of the undertaking following the measure should be compared with its financial situation if the measure had not been taken (84). According to the case-law of the Court of Justice, the concept of aid embraces not only positive benefits, but also measures which in various forms mitigate the charges which are normally included in the budget of an undertaking (85). As regards fiscal measures, an advantage may be granted through different types of reduction in a company’s tax burden (86). Although a measure that entails an exemption from or a reduction of a tax does not involve a positive transfer of resources from the State, it gives rise to an advantage because it places the undertakings to which it applies in a more favourable financial position than other taxpayers and results in a loss of income to the State (87). In particular, in relation to tax measures, in order to evidence a possible tax advantage, it is necessary to assess whether the tax treatment granted to an entity provides it with an advantage in comparison to the normal tax rules (88).
(153) To be considered State aid, a measure must be selective, in the sense that it must favour only certain undertakings or the production of certain goods. According to established case-law of the Court of Justice, the assessment of the material selectivity of a measure takes place in three steps. First, it is necessary to identify and examine the common or normal regime (‘reference system’, ‘system of reference’ or ‘reference framework’) applicable in the Member State concerned. Second, it is in relation to this common or ‘normal’ tax regime that it is necessary to assess and determine if any advantage granted by the tax measure at issue may be selective. This has to be done by demonstrating that the measure derogates from that common regime inasmuch as it differentiates between economic operators that, in the light of the objective pursued by that regime, are in a comparable factual and legal situation. Third, if such derogation exists, it is necessary to examine whether it results from the nature or general scheme of the taxation system of which it forms part and could hence be justified by the nature or logic of the system. In this context, it is for the Member State to show that the differentiated tax treatment derives directly from the basic or guiding principles of that system.
(154) In tax matters, contrary to what Germany argues (89), the assessment of the advantage is thus linked to the assessment of the selectivity criterion, to the extent the existence of a derogatory tax treatment is also assessed in comparison to the reference framework, that is to say the normal tax rules. As also stressed by the Court of Justice (90), the determination of the reference framework is of particular importance in the case of tax measures since the very existence of an advantage may be established only when compared with ‘normal’ taxation. The Commission will thus first present in Section 4.2.5.1 the normal tax rules (reference framework), against which the measures need to be assessed (both for the advantage criterion and for the selectivity criterion). The Commission will then assess the advantage criterion (Section 4.2.5.2) and the selectivity criterion (Section 4.2.5.2.3).
4.2.5.1. The normal tax rules (reference framework)
(155) As the Court of Justice ruled in the World Duty Free case (91), the determination of the reference framework must follow from an objective examination of the content, the structure and the specific effects of the applicable rules under the national law of that Member State. Where the tax measure in question is inseparable from the general tax system of the Member State concerned, reference must be made to that system. On the other hand, where it appears that such a measure is clearly severable from that general system, it cannot be ruled out that the reference framework to be taken into account may be more limited than that general system, or even that it may equate to the measure itself, where the latter appears as a rule having its own legal logic and it is not possible to identify a consistent body of rules external to that measure. It is the Member State concerned which defines, by exercising its exclusive competence in the matter of direct taxation, the characteristics constituting the tax. The determination of the reference system or the ‘normal’ tax regime, on the basis of which it is necessary to analyse the condition relating to selectivity, must take account of those characteristics. It must also be borne in mind that, in so far as the determination of the reference framework must be based on an objective examination of the content and structure of the applicable rules under national law, it is not necessary to take account of the objectives pursued by the legislature when adopting the measure under examination.
4.2.5.1.1. Material scope
(156) As described in more detail in Section 2.2.2, the corporate tax and personal income tax – with the solidarity surcharge – and the trade tax are the taxes that apply generally to all undertakings on their income in Germany (92). Those taxes are applicable to public casinos operators when they carry out non-gambling related activities. Those taxes use as tax base and aim at taxing the profit (93). This was not contested by Germany. While the tax rates of corporate tax/personal income tax and of the solidarity surcharge are laid down uniformly at national level, the municipalities can set (within certain limits) the rate of the trade tax. The normal tax rules may thus vary depending on the location of the operator (the trade tax rate depends on the location of the operator) and its legal form (corporate tax and personal income tax are alternatively applied depending on an entity’s legal form (94)).
(157) In addition, undertakings offering entertainment and in particular gambling services are also – except in Bavaria where the entertainment tax was abolished as from 1980 – generally subject to a specific municipal tax on entertainment (entertainment tax). The features of such taxes are laid down at municipal level, sometimes within the framework (maximum or minimum rate, tax base) set by the Land which, most of the time, devolves most of its tax competence to the municipalities. The applicable entertainment tax rules thus also depend on the location of the operator.
(158) As described in more detail in Section 2.2.3, public casinos operators are explicitly exempted from those normal taxes which would otherwise apply. The normal taxes are, for public casinos operators, deemed to be paid through the special taxes imposed on them (Abgeltung) and described in Section 2.2.1. All the measures described in Section 2.2.1 (casino tax, additional taxes on the GGI, additional tax on the annual profit etc.) are compulsory payments generally applicable to all public casinos operators (in the Land concerned), they are laid down unilaterally by the Länder in their laws, and the sums collected are transferred to the Länder without any counterpart. In view of the German law, they therefore qualify as taxes (95). Those taxes serve to replace the normal taxes from which the public casinos operators are exempted (Abgeltung) and to skim/cream off the profit of public casinos operators for purposes of public benefit (Abschöpfung). As regards the argument raised by the German federal authorities that the two different tax systems (normal tax rules vs specific tax rules for public casinos) have different objectives because the normal tax rules aim at generating revenue without obligation as to the use of the revenue while the taxes collected under the special tax rules should be used for charitable purposes, the Commission notes that the alleged destination of the special taxes (charitable purpose) does not change the fact that these taxes are meant to replace the normal taxes.
(159) The taxes described in Section 2.2.2 constitute the normal tax rules because they apply generally to all undertakings in Germany (for corporate tax, trade tax and the related surcharges) or generally to the entertainment sector (for the entertainment tax). In the absence of the special tax rules applicable to public casinos operators (in particular the explicit tax exemptions they benefit from), these operators would be subject to these normal taxes. The measures in question are inseparable from the general tax system, given the explicit reference to the normal taxes by way of the exemption from those taxes and the skimming and replacement logic of the measures which can only be understood by comparison or reference to the normal tax rules. This is also evidenced by the 1938 law and the laws of the Länder on public casinos which always lay down at the same time these two inextricably linked parts of the complex measure (at least in the form of principles in the 1938 law), namely the special taxes and the exemption from normal taxes. As the measures are inseparable from the general tax system of the Member State concerned, reference must be made to that system to assess advantage and selectivity.
(160) Furthermore, the tax treatment of public casinos operators cannot be considered as a separate system of reference as it is not simply a special purpose levy that would come – following its own specific logic – in addition to the normal taxes. On the contrary, it is meant to replace the normal tax rules. If the measures at stake were simply the additional special taxes applicable to public casinos operators, without the exemptions from normal taxes, these special taxes could on their own be regarded as a separate system of reference following its own logic (special purpose levy). This is, however, not the case as the special taxes are intrinsically linked with the tax exemptions and are supposed to replace the normal taxes.
(161) Germany and several interested parties consider that the tax rules to which public casinos operators are subject (casino tax, etc.) are the reference framework that should be taken into account for the assessment of the advantage and the selectivity of the measures. They additionally and alternatively argue that there is no reference or that there are no normal market conditions so that no selective advantage can be identified. In particular, the German federal authorities broadly argue that the normal taxes do not in principle apply to public casinos operators, which are an ‘exceptional phenomenon’ and very different from gambling halls so that there is no common reference system (and the special tax system for public casinos operators is its own reference framework). They add that, according to the case-law, the normal tax rules can only be the reference system for persons to whom those rules would in principle apply.
(162) The German authorities however do not explain at all why and to what extent the normal taxes would not apply to public casinos operators. It is clear that the normal taxes would apply to public casinos operators if they were not explicitly exempted from these taxes by the measures. It is noteworthy in that regard to observe that public casinos operators are subject (without any difference or adaptation) to the normal tax rules when they provide services other than gambling services. The Commission also notes, as regards the taxation of public casinos operators’ gambling activities, that it was necessary to lay down explicit exemptions from the normal taxes so that public casinos operators do not pay those taxes which would otherwise normally apply to them and even applied to them in the past when there were no tax exemptions (96). The tax exemptions in question have a substantial effect (without them, public casinos operators would pay the normal taxes) and not a mere formal or declaratory nature (a case in which removing these exemptions would not change the situation because, for example, public casinos operators would be exempted from the same taxes following other more general tax rules) (97). German courts also took the view that, in the absence of the special tax rules, public casinos operators would be subject to the normal tax rules, also because the special taxes (casino tax and possibly other special taxes) are explicitly regarded as a replacement for the normal taxes (98).
(163) More generally, it is always possible – as Germany does – to find specificities characterising certain undertakings or certain economic sectors (be it only their particular activities or the non-fiscal regulatory framework applicable to them). Such specificities are not sufficient to consider that these undertakings or sectors would be subject to their own reference system when normal taxes would apply to them following the normal tax rules. The different factual and legal situation of certain undertakings can however be relevant to a certain extent in the second step of the analysis which will be assessed in Section 4.2.5.3.1.
(164) In an attempt to limit the relevance of the explicit tax exemptions for the selectivity reasoning (they create an obvious link to the normal tax rules and represent a derogation from these rules), Germany also argues that those exemptions are not the cause of the different tax treatment but a mere consequence of the special taxes (with the aim to avoid double taxation). This however does not change the fact that, in the absence of these tax exemptions, public casinos operators would be subject to the normal taxes as these operators and activities normally fall within their usual scope of application.
(165) The fact also remains that the special taxes paid by public casinos are meant to replace the normal tax rules (Abgeltung), which again points to the fact that these normal tax rules are the relevant reference framework. It is not the mere existence of special taxes (and of the different tax treatment) that justifies the exemption from normal taxes. It is the fact that the special taxes are meant to replace the normal taxes. Only in that case the tax exemptions are the logical consequence of the special taxes, in the light of the need to prevent double taxation (99). In addition, the existence of special taxes is only justified by the fact that the normal tax rules could not achieve a sufficiently high level of skimming of the public casinos’ profit (100). Therefore, the design and the logic of the special tax treatment (replacement and skimming, Abgeltung and Abschöpfung) can only be understood by reference to the level of taxation under normal tax rules and thus to the normal tax rules.
(166) It is thus true that the tax exemptions are a consequence of the special taxes. But the exemptions are only justified and so to speak ‘neutral’ (that is, merely preventing double taxation) if the special taxes indeed replace the normal taxes and do not lead to a tax burden lower than under the normal tax rules (because, in the latter case, there cannot be ‘double taxation’). As nothing ensures that the special taxes will lead to at least the same tax burden as under the normal tax rules (see recital (177); Germany even alleges that, in the case of low profits, the special tax rules may or even should lead to lower taxation than under the normal tax rules), the tax exemptions cannot be regarded as simply preventing double taxation. Those tax exemptions are not simply a logical consequence of the existence of special taxes. They go beyond a mere prevention of double taxation: they allow non-taxation up to the difference between the tax burden under the normal tax rules and the tax burden under the special taxes. They are thus not neutral for the assessment and should be fully taken into account. To the extent Germany’s argument would aim at justifying the measure by the logic of the tax system (third step of the selectivity reasoning), it is examined in Section 4.2.5.3.2.
(167) In the context of the advantage criterion, SBN also submits that the two tax systems are very different, that there are no normal market conditions for public casinos operators as in the Kernkraftwerke Lippe-Ems case (101), and that the reference to assess the existence of an advantage should be found in national tax legislation and take into account the objective of the special tax system. These arguments boil down to contesting that the normal tax rules as described in Section 4.2.5.1 are the reference to be used to assess the existence of an advantage and of the selective character of the measures. It is thus relevant to assess them together with the other arguments related to the reference system used by the Commission. The arguments raised by SBN are however ineffective to the extent that SBN does not contest that, in the absence of the special tax rules for public casinos operators, those operators would be subject to the normally applicable taxes following the general rules of taxation applicable in Germany. SBN also does not explain why the normal tax rules as described in Section 4.2.5.1 are not the reference. In that regard, the fact that the two tax systems would be very different does not mean that normal tax rules as described in Section 4.2.5.1 are not the reference, it simply means that the tax rules applicable to public casinos operators are different, which supports the idea that they constitute a derogation from those normal tax rules. The reference made by SBN to the Kernkraftwerke Lippe-Ems GmbH case is not relevant because that case-law did not deal with exemptions from normally applicable taxes (and special taxes replacing the latter) but with special additional taxes for certain operators (the special taxes were not meant to replace the normal taxes, contrary to the situation in the present case where the operators are exempted from the normal taxes). Furthermore, the regulatory objective of the special taxes (casino tax, etc.) is not relevant (102) for the identification of the reference framework and the normal market conditions (normal taxation).
4.2.5.1.2. Geographical scope of the reference framework, repartition of competence within the German authorities to tax public casinos and other operators
(168) In their comments, certain interested parties (SHSWSN) refer to the case-law of the Court of Justice on symmetrical devolution of tax powers and regional selectivity. They explain that the two tax systems (normal tax rules and special tax rules) are imputable to two different legislative competences (federal State and Länder) so that the only possible reference framework is the special tax system.
(169) Contrary to what is claimed by SHSWSN, it is straightforward to identify a reference framework in this case, because the special taxes are meant to replace the normal taxes from which the public casinos operators are explicitly exempted (see Section 2.2.3).
(170) The case-law of the Court of Justice about regional selectivity mentioned by SHSWSN (103) is also not relevant in this case because the German Federal State did not (generally) devolve (symmetrically or not) to infra-State entities the power to set the tax rules applicable to (all) undertakings within the territory of these infra-State entities. For all operators other than public casinos operators, there are no special tax rules laid down by the Länder that would replace the normal taxes such as corporate tax, income tax or trade tax. Even public casinos operators are subject to the normal tax rules when they provide services other than gambling services or services that are closely related to gambling services. The Länder are not in general the competent authority to define the normal tax rules (in particular for VAT, corporate tax, income tax and trade tax) applicable in their respective territories, even for public casinos operators.
(171) Moreover, at least a part of the special tax measures (the exemption from corporate tax and income tax and trade tax) is laid down by the State in national/federal laws and public casinos operators are (also for their gambling activities) subject to VAT, the same as all other undertakings. Thus, it is not correct to claim that the special tax system of public casinos operators would only be set by the Länder. It is also incorrect to claim that the normal tax rules are imputable only to the (federal) State: the Länder can decide to levy or not an entertainment tax, and can decide on the exemptions from municipal taxes for public casinos (trade tax and entertainment tax); the cities can set the rates of the trade tax and, within the framework defined at the level of the Land, they can set the features (tax base and tax rate) of the entertainment tax. Thus, using their competence, the Länder can shape, at least to a certain extent, both the normal and the special tax rules. In the same vein, the State is also involved in the taxation of public casinos: the State is competent as regards corporate tax and income tax (currently it grants an exemption from those taxes pursuant to Article 6(1) of the 1938 law) and VAT (until 2006, the State exempted public casinos from VAT).
(172) Overall, it is thus incorrect to claim that there would be two tax systems (normal tax rules and special tax rules) imputable to two different legislative competences that would each be competent to define a specific reference framework applicable to materially different entities: competences mostly overlap in this case.
(173) This Decision however acknowledges the tax competence of the Länder with regard to public casinos operators (each Land has specific rules on the casino tax for instance) by assessing individually each scheme (the special tax rules applicable to public casinos operators) at the level of the Land and with regard to the normal tax rules applicable in that Land. This Decision also acknowledges the tax competence of the cities by taking into account the situation in each municipality as regards the normal tax rules that would apply to public casinos operators (tax rate of the trade tax, tax rate, tax base and other tax features of the entertainment tax).
4.2.5.2. Advantage
(174) To assess whether the measures lead to an advantage, it is necessary to compare (the tax burden arising from) the special tax rules to (the tax burden arising from) the normal tax rules as set out in Section 4.2.5.1.
4.2.5.2.1. Advantage within the meaning of the Fútbol Club Barcelona case-law
(175) In order to determine whether a tax scheme provides an advantage, it is usually sufficient to compare ex ante the legal features of the measure under assessment with the normal tax rules. In cases involving a measure derogating from the normal tax rules, in particular in the France Telecom (104) and Fútbol Club Barcelona cases (105), the Court of Justice ruled that the advantage criterion is already met when a scheme grants a mere ‘potential’ advantage which may materialise only in certain circumstances. The Court noted that considering that the measures examined in these cases only involve State aid if an actual advantage materialises in all tax years under the scheme would amount to rewarding non-transparent forms of aid and favouring Member States which violate the standstill clause within the meaning of Article 108(3) TFEU. In particular, the fact that, for each tax year, the actual existence of an advantage (its specific amount) depends on external and random circumstances does not prevent the Commission from concluding that the measure provides an advantage (106).
(176) The case at hand is, as already explained in the opening decision (107), similar to the France Telecom and Fútbol Club Barcelona cases, to the extent it is impossible to conclude ex ante that the special tax rules (combination of the tax exemptions and of the special taxes where the special taxes do not relate directly to the normal tax rules, contrary to a reduced rate for example) will automatically, generally and always lead to an actual advantage (or disadvantage). The amount of tax paid under the normal tax system and under the special taxes depends on random circumstances or choices freely made by the operators, which are not legal features of the tax regime that can be assessed ex ante. There is a possibility that the special tax rules may lead to an actual advantage in certain circumstances, which is sufficient to conclude that the measures provide an advantage for State aid purposes.
(177) In particular, because a specific group of operators is subject to a special tax treatment (the special tax schemes of the Länder applicable only to public casinos operators which replace the normally applicable tax rules), and because there is no general provision (such as a claw-back or offsetting mechanism (108)) automatically preventing that the special tax treatment is more advantageous compared to the normal tax rules, this regime provides an advantage to this group of operators.
(178) Germany argues that the France Telecom case-law is not relevant because the beneficiary in that case was subject to the normal tax rules except for specific aspects. The Commission considers that that case-law is relevant as public casinos are also subject to the normal tax rules when they carry out any activity other than gambling activities. They are also subject to normal tax rules (such as VAT) for their gambling activities, except for the aspects examined in this Decision. In any event, in France Telecom, the Court did not make its assessment dependent on the fact that the beneficiary was, except for the measure at stake, subject to the normal tax rules.
(179) Several public casinos operators (SHSWSN, FBS, SBN) submit that they did not benefit from an advantage under their special tax rules because they would have borne a lower tax burden under the normal tax rules. However, as follows from the case law (109), the question of the materialisation of the advantage, i.e. whether the measures have actually conferred an advantage on its beneficiaries taken individually, is only relevant at the recovery stage.
(180) In the Land Hamburg and in line with the reasoning mentioned in recitals (176) and (177), the recent legislative change (introduction of an equalization tax (see recital (26)) however ensures that, as from 1 January 2024, there is no advantage for the public casino operator. The Commission notes in that regard that the calculation of the amount of tax that would be due under the normal tax rules relies on the regular application of those normal tax rules, on the basis of commonly accepted and even sometimes conservative assumptions (110).
4.2.5.2.2. Alleged compensation for a service of general economic interest
(181) The ECA submits that (i) a possible tax advantage would merely constitute compensation by the State for the provision of services of general economic interest (SGEI) by the German public casinos, and (ii) the public casinos operators have been entrusted by the Länder with the public task of curbing illegal gambling and providing state-monitored opportunities to satisfy the irrepressible human need to gamble. The measures however do not meet several of the cumulative criteria laid down in the Altmark case-law (111) for the SGEI compensation not to confer an advantage.
(182) Firstly, Germany did not argue and there is no indication that public casinos operators have been entrusted with clearly defined public service obligations (within the meaning of the Altmark case law). Neither did Germany argue that public casinos operators provide services which, if they were considering their own commercial interest, they would not assume or would not assume to the same extent or under the same conditions. The Commission also notes in that regard that there are (or were at some point in the past) no public casinos operators (and thus no services at all) in certain Länder.
(183) Secondly, the parameters on the basis of which the compensation is calculated are not established in advance and a fortiori not in an objective and transparent manner.
(184) Thirdly, in the absence of an ex ante definition of the compensation and in view of the design of the measures (absence of any link to the costs of the alleged public service obligations), it cannot be ensured that the compensation will not exceed what is necessary to cover all or part of the costs incurred in the discharge of public service obligations.
(185) Fourthly, there is no requirement (112) to select the operators at stake through a public procurement procedure which would allow for selection of the tenderer capable of providing those services at the least cost to the community. In addition, the level of compensation was also not determined on the basis of an analysis of the costs which a typical undertaking would have incurred.
(186) In conclusion, the measures do not fulfil the conditions of the Altmark case law under which an SGEI compensation does not confer an advantage. On the contrary, the measures are liable to provide an advantage (potential advantage by comparison to the normal tax rules), in particular given the absence of any claw-back mechanism.
4.2.5.2.3. Alleged market conformity of the measures
(187) To the extent SBN argues that a private operator would also have granted tax advantages to keep the casinos alive in the view of the regulatory purpose to propose regulated access to risky games, this can be regarded as a reference to a possible market conformity of the advantage provided to public casinos operators. The objective brought forward by SBN – and which would have allegedly guided the action of a hypothetical private operator – is however precisely the kind of policy objective that only the State could pursue and that cannot be taken into account in the market economy operator test. Here the State acts as a public authority. The tax measures examined are obviously not comparable with decisions of investment of a private operator. The measures are thus not market conform.
4.2.5.3. Selectivity
(188) To be considered State aid, a measure must be selective, in the sense that it must favour only ‘certain undertakings’ or the production of ‘certain goods’. While at first sight the special tax rules in question are obviously and explicitly only benefitting public casinos operators and thus ‘certain undertakings’, the selectivity of a tax scheme should in principle be assessed in three steps (113): the first step (determination of the system of reference) was examined in Section 4.2.5.1; the second and third steps will be examined in the following recitals.
4.2.5.3.1. Derogation from the reference system
(189) Taking the normal tax rules as the reference system, it must be assessed, in a second step, if the measures derogate from the ‘normal’ tax rules inasmuch as they differentiate between economic operators that, in the light of the objective pursued by the normal tax regime, are in a comparable factual and legal situation. As described in more detail in Section 2.2.1, public casinos operators are exempted from certain taxes to which other undertakings are normally subject, namely corporate tax or income tax, trade tax and – to the extent that these other undertakings provide entertainment services – entertainment tax (where it exists). They are subject to a special tax regime (114) involving different taxes (with different names, bases and rates) laid down by each Land. This special system is meant to replace the normal taxes from which public casinos operators are exempted (corporate tax/income tax and the related surcharges, trade tax and entertainment tax). It is thus in the light of the objective of those normal (otherwise applicable) taxes that the selectivity assessment should be carried out, this objective being in principle linked with (or reflected by) the triggering event of the tax or the tax base (115). Conversely, the objective of the special taxes is not relevant at this stage of the selectivity reasoning (116): this is why the fact that the special taxes paid by public casinos operators would be intended to benefit charitable purposes or would have a regulatory objective has no bearing on the second step of the selectivity reasoning.
(190) In the light of the objective of corporate tax and income tax (and the related surcharges) and trade tax, namely to tax profit (recital (156)), all undertakings (including undertakings providing gambling services) are in a comparable situation, to the extent they make profit. In the light of that objective, the fact that public casinos operators would operate on the basis of legal monopolies is not relevant, inter alia because such monopolies were deemed by the German legislator to be very profitable (see recital (38)), so that taxing them is consistent with the objective of the general taxes on profit at stake. Similarly, the fact that public casinos operators would be subject to other special taxes (that may however lead to a possible advantage overall) or to specific regulatory rules regarding the prevention of addictive behaviours or the fact that the games offered in public casinos are different from the ones offered by the gambling halls is not relevant in the light of the objective of the general taxes on profit. Therefore, a possible advantage for the public casinos operators arising from the measures (including the exemption from corporate tax/income tax, from the related solidarity surcharge and from trade tax) is prima facie selective.
(191) Germany argues that the tax base of the solidarity surcharge is the amount of corporate and income tax, so that the public casinos operators would not pay any amount of solidarity surcharge even in the absence of an exemption from that solidarity surcharge. This reasoning is however based on the false premise that there would never be a positive amount of corporate tax or income tax under the normal tax rules. However, this only applies within the framework of the special tax rules where there is a corporate and income tax exemption, but it is not the case under the normal tax rules.
(192) As regards the entertainment tax, in the cities where it exists, the objective of that tax is to tax entertainment activities (in particular gambling machines, other gambling or playing for money). The municipal entertainment tax laws usually tax gambling machines (Spielautomat) or gambling devices (Spielgeräte or Spielapparaten) which are nowadays the main type of game offered in public casinos. This can be regarded as also covering table games offered in public casinos. Gambling more generally (and thus in particular table games) is sometimes taxed using a generic triggering event, e.g. playing for money (Ausspielen von Geld, Spielen um Geld or Geldausspielungen). More specifically, the objective is to tax entertainment on the basis of the money ‘spent’ or ‘played/gambled’ by the persons entertaining themselves (‘sich ein Vergnügen leistet’
), as consistently highlighted by the case-law of the German courts (117) and in line with the name of the tax. This was not contested by Germany. In the light of this objective, the public casinos operators, to the extent they provide gambling activities (in particular gambling machines and table games), which constitute a type of ‘entertainment’ and ‘gambling’ for which players spend money to entertain themselves, are in a comparable situation compared to the gambling halls and the games they offer (or to other entertainment activities) that are subject to the tax. Accordingly, all those operators are, to the extent they offer entertainment (and in particular gambling) services, in a comparable situation in the light of the objective of the entertainment tax.
(193) To the extent the measures subject public casinos operators to special tax rules without differentiating between their gambling activities (table games and gambling machines) but merely by reference to their quality of public casinos operators, the subcategory of gambling activities carried out by these operators is not directly relevant to assess whether the schemes are selective. In the light of the objective of the entertainment tax, public casinos operators, to the extent they provide gambling activities (for instance gambling machines), are in the same situation as other operators subject to the entertainment tax such as the gambling halls which provide comparable gambling activities (gambling machines). The alleged fact that certain entertainment tax laws as they are drafted would not specifically cover table games is also irrelevant to the extent that the drafting of those laws directly stems from the existence of the special tax rules: table games are not specifically taxed in the entertainment tax laws because public casinos are generally exempted from the entertainment tax from the outset while they are the only operators allowed to offer table games. Certain Länder clarified that it would be for the cities to determine whether table games would be taxed. By doing so, the cities would need to duly take into account the applicable principles of non-discrimination and equality of treatment. The normal tax rules by reference to which selectivity should be assessed must therefore, in this case, be processed to remove the effects of the measures, in particular the exemption from the entertainment tax. While it is acceptable that table games in public casinos would not be taxed under the entertainment tax in Bavaria (because there is no entertainment tax at all), table games in public casinos would necessarily be taxed in Länder where entertainment or at least some gambling is taxed (which is the case in all Länder – except Bavaria – to the extent the entertainment tax laws tax gambling machines). In any event, as evidenced by the fact that some public casinos (at a time where they offered mostly or only table games) used to be subject to the entertainment tax before being exempted, not subjecting table games to the entertainment tax would be selective by design and constitute a situation in which the boundaries of the system of reference have been designed in a clearly arbitrary or biased way (118). Taxing gambling machines in gambling halls without taxing table games which are at least as addictive would also constitute a discrimination in the light of the possible secondary objective of the entertainment tax (see recitals (196) to (199)).
(194) The fact (alleged by Germany) that games offered by public casinos are in general prohibited (unless a specific concession is granted to offer these games) while the games offered by gambling halls are normal economic activities simply subject to a licence is not relevant in the light of the objective of the entertainment tax. In addition, public casinos operators have and have had legal concessions to carry out their activities (and Germany does not contest that these games and concessions were legal). The reasoning that illegal games should not be taxed under the entertainment tax is thus not relevant. The argument by Germany that games offered by public casinos would not be in competition with the games offered by gambling halls, which the Commission contests in any event (see Section 4.2.3), is also not relevant in the light of the objective of the entertainment tax which encompasses many very different types of entertainment (119).
(195) Germany also argues that table games offered by public casinos are more work-intensive than the operation of gambling halls. This is however also not relevant in the light of the objective of the tax which is to tax the money ‘spent’ or ‘played/gambled’ by the persons entertaining themselves (120). Besides, public casinos in certain cities or Länder do not offer table games and, in general, table games account for only a minor fraction of the public casinos’ turnover.
(196) The German authorities explained that the entertainment tax may also additionally pursue the objective (außerfiskalisches Lenkungsziel) of tackling addiction (namely to dis-incentivise gambling, which is seen as a risky or socially objectionable occupation) (121).
(197) Such a secondary and only possible objective cannot be taken into account in the selectivity assessment: some sorts of entertainment subject to the entertainment tax in many cities are not risky or socially objectionable occupations (122) so that this alleged secondary objective is not or at least not always relevant. In addition, this secondary objective simply reflects the fact that imposing any tax burden on an activity will, all other things being equal, make it less attractive (on the demand or on the supply side (123)). This objective thus stems directly from the main objective without being different from that main objective or requiring a different setup of the tax and thus a separate assessment is not required. Furthermore, the German courts explicitly stated that, even if the entertainment tax follows such an additional objective, this should not put into question the primary objective of the tax and its relationship to the money spent by the player in order to be entertained (124).
(198) In any event, in the light of this secondary objective, the games offered by the public casinos operators and thus also those operators themselves are in a comparable situation to the gambling halls (and the games they offer) because all these games are risky and addictive. While both types of games (the ones offered by public casinos and the ones offered by gambling halls) may have different risks and are also – for that very reason – subject to distinct regulatory frameworks (see Section 2.1), neither Germany nor the interested parties argue that these factual and legal differences, taken together, would make the games sufficiently different in the light of the objective of the entertainment tax. On the contrary, Germany argues that the stricter regulatory framework for public casinos operators reflects the higher addiction risk of the games they offer (and conversely the lower regulation of gambling halls reflects the lower risks that these games represent) and that public casinos fight against gambling addiction through their regulatory framework, not through taxation. This means that the factual differences between the games at stake (in terms of addictive potential) are already taken into account (compensated) by legal differences in their respective (non-fiscal) regulatory framework, so that they are ultimately in the same situation in the light of the (secondary) objective of the tax. There is also no indication that the specific regulatory framework applicable to public casinos completely removes the inherent risks of the games offered in public casinos, so that they should not be subject to the entertainment tax. This is also true for the games offered in commercial gambling halls: they are subject to the entertainment tax even though they are also subject to a specific regulatory framework to limit the risk they represent in terms of addiction, public health and players’ protection. For the purpose of the entertainment tax and in the light of the objectives of that tax, both types of games (and both types of operators) can thus be regarded as being in a comparable situation.
(199) More generally, the fact that public casinos operators (and all the games they offer) should be subject to entertainment tax, in the light of its objective, in the same way as gambling halls, is confirmed by the statements made by several Länder (in reply to questions of the Commission), according to which public casinos operators would be subject to the entertainment tax if they were not legally exempted from that tax. The case-law of German courts also shows that the special taxes paid by public casinos operators replaces the normal taxes, including the entertainment tax (125), which would not make sense if public casinos (and their games) would not fall under the scope of that tax in the first place. In the same vein, the entertainment tax laws of the cities often explicitly exempt public casinos from entertainment tax, which also shows that the games offered by public casinos are regarded as falling, in principle, within the scope and under the objective of the entertainment tax. In addition, some public casinos operators used to pay the entertainment tax in the past (after such tax was introduced and before exemptions from entertainment tax were introduced) (126). Furthermore, still today, municipalities receive (as a transfer from the Länder) a fraction of the casino tax (levied on the GGI arising from all games offered in public casinos) to account for the loss of revenues arising from the exemption from entertainment tax (and trade tax) (127).
(200) As a conclusion, a possible advantage arising from the measures is prima facie selective.
4.2.5.3.2. Justification
(201) It is up to Germany to explain how the prima facie selective measures can be justified (and thus not selective) by reasons deriving directly from the intrinsic basic or guiding principles of the reference system or by being the result of inherent mechanisms necessary for the functioning and effectiveness of the system (128).
(202) Apart from arguing that no justification can be provided in cases where there is no common reference system (which Germany claims but the Commission contests), the German authorities merely stated that the constitutional principle of prevention of double and excessive taxation (Vermeidung einer doppelten und damit übermäßigen Besteuerung) should be taken into account (129). That objective may be regarded as a guiding principle of the German tax system: it is supported by the case-law of the German constitutional tribunal which refers to the principle of proportionality (130).
(203) However, by merely mentioning the constitutional principle of prevention of double and excessive taxation, Germany did not explain how the (possibly unlimited) advantage provided by the measures could be regarded as justified by that principle, let alone be proportionate (131). In addition, Germany’s reasoning can only aim at justifying a lower tax burden for public casinos operators under the special tax rules because taxation under the normal tax rules (the only reference for the identification of an advantage for State aid purposes) would allegedly be excessive. Germany however does not explain why and how this would be the case. The idea that taxation under the normal tax rules would be excessive also directly contradicts the assumption originally made by the German legislator that taxation under normal tax rules was insufficient (leading to a too low tax burden) to cream off the unusually high profit of public casinos operators.
(204) Furthermore, to the extent Germany would aim at justifying ad hoc reductions of special taxes for public casinos operators because taxation under the special tax rules would be excessive (so that ad hoc reductions would be necessary), this is not the subject of this Decision which focuses on the difference of taxation in comparison to the normal tax rules: the ad hoc reductions of the special taxes are part of the special tax rules and thus part of the measures to be assessed by comparison with the normal tax rules. Germany also does not adduce evidence showing that the tax burden of public casinos operators (under the special tax rules) was regarded as excessive. In the only case (known to the Commission) where the public casinos operators’ taxation was examined from the point of view of excessive taxation by German courts, the German court ruled that the tax system of public casinos operators in the Land in question was not as such the cause of the alleged excessive taxation of the operator at stake, even though the operator was forced to terminate its activities (132).
(205) In any case, the design of the measures (special taxes replacing the normal taxes from which public casinos are exempted), which does not refer to the level of taxation under the normal tax rules or to any possible proxy for excessive taxation (133), does not ensure that such a justification would be achieved in a proportionate manner.
(206) Certain operators such as SBN, and to some extent the German federal authorities, submit that the special tax system applicable to public casinos operators primarily pursues regulatory purposes (allow the public casinos operators to carry out their public task) which would constitute a justification by the logic of the tax system. Such alleged objectives are contradicted by the facts (134), by the design of the special tax rules (135) and by the case-law (136). They are external to the tax systems in question (corporate tax and income tax, trade tax, entertainment tax) and cannot constitute a justification by the guiding (internal) principles of the normal tax rules. They were not consistently applied in practice (137). In addition, the design of the measures, which does not refer to any objective proxy related to safeguarding the economic viability of public casinos operators in the light of their public tasks, does not ensure that such an alleged justification would be achieved in a proportionate and adequate manner.
4.2.5.4. Conclusion
(207) In view of the above, the measures involve a selective advantage to the public casinos operators, except – as from 1 January 2024 – in the Land Hamburg.
4.3. New aid or existing aid
(208) According to Article 1, point (b)(i), of Council Regulation (EU) 2015/1589 (138), an aid measure is ‘existing if it ‘existed prior to the entry into force of the TFEU in the respective Member States’; this concerns
‘aid schemes and individual aid which were put into effect before, and are still applicable after, the entry into force of the TFEU in the respective Member States’. The TFEU (139) entered into force in Germany on 1 January 1958 (for the Western German Länder) and 3 October 1990 (for the East German Länder).
(209) According to Article 1, point (c), of the Regulation (EU) 2015/1589the concept of ‘new aid’ includes ‘alterations to existing aid’. Such alterations must be material, not simply of a formal nature, to qualify as new aid: an alteration cannot be characterised as being of a purely formal or administrative nature if it is ‘liable to affect the evaluation of the compatibility of the aid measure with the common market’ (140). In that framework (see Article 4 of Commission Regulation (EC) No 794/2004 (141)) also a change reducing the aid intensity or the scope of the existing aid constitutes an alteration (142). In addition, if the alteration affects the actual substance of the original scheme (substantial alteration), the alteration affects the existing aid nature of the scheme itself. However, where the alteration is ‘clearly severable’ from the initial scheme (143), only the severable element of the scheme that was modified qualifies as new aid.
(210) It is thus necessary to examine whether the measures were put into effect before the entry into force of the TFEU (Section 4.3.1) and if so, whether such ‘existing’ measures were altered after the entry into force of the TFEU (Section 4.3.2). In all cases (i.e. for all Länder), this analysis shows that the special tax treatment of public casinos operators (as it existed during the recovery period (144)) did not exist before the entry into force of the TFEU, so that the aid at stake is not existing aid. In particular, Section 4.3.1 shows that, in some Länder, no measure was put into effect before the entry into force of the TFEU. Section 4.3.2.1 demonstrates that in some other Länder, the measures that were put into effect before the entry into force of the TFEU were not the basis for the special tax treatment of the operators during the recovery period. Furthermore and as an additional line of reasoning, even if some measures existed and were put into effect before the entry into force of the TFEU, they were materially and substantially modified after the entry into force of the TFEU and before the beginning of the recovery period, as will be demonstrated in Sections 4.3.2.2.2 and 4.3.2.2.3 (reduction of the casino tax rate) and Section 4.3.2.3 (introduction of a new normal tax).
4.3.1. Situation before the entry into force of the TFEU
4.3.1.1. In the East German
Länder
(211) In the East German Länder (including East Berlin), public casinos operators were generally (any operator, for any casino, without limit in time) subject to special taxes (a casino tax of 85 %) and exempted from income tax, corporate tax (145), trade tax and entertainment tax on the basis of two laws adopted before 3 October 1990 (146). There was thus in these Länder a scheme (a fully fledged scheme, without a need for implementing or complementing measures) in place before the entry into force of the TFEU.
(212) In two East German Länder (East Berlin and Saxony), fully fledged special taxes existed and were actually ‘put into effect’ before the entry into force of the TFEU because public casinos had opened and were subject to the existing special tax rules already before the entry into force of the TFEU (147).
(213) In the other East German Länder, even though fully fledged special tax schemes existed before the entry into force of the TFEU, they were not actually ‘put into effect’ because no public casinos existed at that time (148). It follows from the actual wording of Article 1, point (b)(i), of Regulation (EU) 2015/1589, in particular the use of the term ‘put into effect’, that existing aid, for the purposes of that provision, does not mean aid or an aid scheme which was created before the entry into force of the TFEU in the respective Member State, but which was implemented in that State only after that date (149).
(214) The schemes existing in these other East German Länder (Brandenburg, Mecklenburg-Vorpommern, Saxony-Anhalt and Thuringia) before the entry into force of the TFEU thus cannot be regarded as existing measures and the aid they provide is necessarily new aid. Only the schemes put into effect in East Berlin and Saxony can be regarded as existing before the entry into force of the TFEU.
(215) Unless the schemes in East Berlin and Saxony were altered after the entry into force of the TFEU, those two schemes would be existing aid measures. It is thus necessary to examine whether and to which extent these measures were materially and substantially altered after the entry into force of the TFEU. This will be examined in Section 4.3.2.2.
4.3.1.2. In the West German
Länder
(216) It is true that the general principles governing the taxation of public casinos operators (application of a special tax system aiming at skimming their profits) have been laid down well before the entry into force of the TFEU (in the 1933 law and in the 1938 law). However, these laws are too vague (lex imperfecta, according to the German courts (150)) and cannot be regarded as laying down a State aid measure. Contrary to what Germany argues, the 1938 law cannot be regarded as exempting public casinos operators from Länder taxes and municipal taxes. Article 6(2) of that law was too imprecise to be (and was never) directly applied: it merely laid down a possibility for the competent authorities (Ermächtigung (151)) to lay down, in the future, exemptions from Länder taxes and municipal taxes, which calls for further ‘implementing measures’ so that the 1933 and 1938 laws cannot be regarded as laying down a State aid measure. The fact that some public casinos operators, after 1938, paid entertainment tax or trade tax (152) confirms that the 1938 law did not exempt them from those taxes. In the same vein, the 1938 law did not introduce a sufficiently precise system of special taxes (the casino tax was mentioned but its main features, especially the tax rate, were not defined and it thus called for implementing measures). Furthermore, arguing (as Germany does) that the 1933 and 1938 laws are sufficiently precise to be regarded today as a (unique) existing scheme contradicts the current situation in which each Land defines its own specific tax scheme for public casinos operators (a situation where the tax rules applying to public casinos operators are sometimes very different depending on the Länder and where each set of special tax rules rather constitutes a scheme on its own). The insufficiently precise provisions of the 1933 and 1938 laws are thus irrelevant for the qualification as new or existing aid.
(217) Furthermore, as explained in Section 4.1, the schemes of the Länder are complex measures comprising two inseparable aspects (special taxes and exemptions from normal taxes). From that perspective, a separate or autonomous assessment of each of the (intrinsically linked) aspects of those measures would not take into account the specific nature of the measures. For that reason, the assessment must focus on the measures to the extent they exist, that is as fully fledged measures, and not on the separate sub-measures which do not logically exist autonomously. Consequently, if some aspects of the schemes (for instance the special taxes) were not laid down before the entry into force of the TFEU, the schemes at stake cannot be existing aid as they did not even exist as measures: the mere fact that some of the tax exemptions such as the corporate tax and income tax exemption may have been laid down before the entry into force of the TFEU cannot be relevant as these earlier measures were missing complementing and implementing measures (153).
(218) This is for example the case in all the Länder which first introduced the exemptions from local taxes and the special taxes in the 1970s and which had no public casinos before: there was no (fully fledged) ‘measure’ and, in addition, no special tax treatment could be ‘put into effect’ (as there was no public casino) before the entry into force of the TFEU in West Berlin, Bremen, Hamburg, Lower Saxony, North Rhine-Westphalia and Saarland (see Section 4.3.2.1.1 on the situation in these Länder after the entry into force of the TFEU).
(219) In the other West German Länder (Baden-Württemberg, Bavaria, Hesse, Rhineland-Palatinate, Schleswig-Holstein), there were some existing (fully fledged) measures put into effect before the entry into force of the TFEU but they did not concern all public casinos operators generally, for any casino, and were limited in time. They concerned only the operators existing at the time, only for a limited period of time and only for the operation of specific casinos (see the detailed assessment in Section 4.3.2.1.2).
(220) In the cases mentioned in recital (218) where there were no (fully fledged) ‘measures’ before the entry into force of the TFEU, there cannot be ‘existing’ measures and the special tax treatment necessarily constitutes new aid (in its entirety). As regards the cases mentioned in recital (219) where fully fledged measures existed but were not generally applicable, it still needs to be examined whether they constitute the basis for the special tax treatment of public casinos during the recovery period (154) (Section 4.3.2.1.2) and (as an additional reasoning) whether these measures underwent alterations after the entry into force of the TFEU (see Section 4.3.2.2).
4.3.2. Situation after the entry into force of the TFEU
(221) The provisions laying down the special tax treatment of public casinos operators underwent a series of changes after the entry into force of the TFEU, both before and after the beginning of the recovery period. In situations described in recitals (218) and (219), measures that lay down the special tax treatment of public casinos during the recovery period did not exist before the entry into force of the TFEU. Some of the changes after the entry into force of the TFEU (introduction of the special tax and of the exemption from municipal taxes) thus lead to the very creation of the measures (which makes them new aid in their entirety). In other situations (and also as an alternative reasoning for the situations described in recitals (218) and (219)), the changes that happened after the entry into force of the TFEU will be assessed as to whether they constitute material and substantial alterations.
4.3.2.1. Introduction of generally applicable exemptions from
Länder
taxes and municipal taxes (trade tax and entertainment tax) and of generally applicable special taxes in the West German
Länder
(222) The generally (155) applicable exemptions from Länder taxes and municipal taxes (which in effect encompasses trade tax and entertainment tax) and the special taxes on public casinos operators (casino tax in particular) constitute the main features of the tax schemes applicable to public casinos operators. In all West German Länder, the measures laying down the special tax treatment of public casinos during the recovery period were introduced by laws adopted after the entry into force of the TFEU and before the beginning of the recovery period, as explained in the two sub-sections below. As public casinos are, since the beginning of the recovery period, subject to special tax treatment on the basis of measures adopted after the entry into force of the TFEU, the aid they received is prima facie new aid.
4.3.2.1.1. In Länder where there were no public casinos before the entry into force of the TFEU
(223) In six West German Länder (West Berlin, Bremen, Hamburg, Lower Saxony, North Rhine-Westphalia and Saarland), there was no special tax on public casinos (casino tax) and no exemption from Länder taxes and municipal taxes predating the entry into force of the TFEU (because there were no public casinos in these Länder before that date). The generally applicable exemption from Länder taxes and municipal taxes and the special taxes were introduced in the laws of the Länder after 1958 and before the beginning of the recovery period, as illustrated in Table 1 below.
Table 1
First provision laying down the exemption from Länder taxes and municipal taxes and the main features of the casino tax
Berlin (West Berlin in 1973)
Law of 13.4.1973 (156) Bremen
Law of 20.2.1978 (157) Hamburg
Law of 24.5.1976 (158) Lower Saxony
Law of 25.7.1973 (159) North Rhine-Westphalia
Law of 19.3.1974 (160) Saarland
Licence (Spielbankerlaubnis) of 22.10.1976 (for the first public casino). Law of 9.7.2003 (generally applicable) (161) (224) Before the adoption of these laws of the Länder, there were no fully fledged (let alone put into effect) schemes in the six West German Länder at stake. There were thus no existing schemes before the entry into force of the TFEU, so that the aid schemes at stake today cannot be regarded as existing aid and the aid they provide is necessarily (in its entirety) new aid (see also Section 4.3.1.2).
(225) As an alternative reasoning, if one considers that the different parts of each special tax scheme should be assessed separately (contrary to the main line of reasoning set out in recitals (216) and (217), which relies on the idea that the schemes do not exist as long as all their complementary features – special taxes and tax exemptions – are not precisely laid down), the adoption after the entry into force of the TFEU of laws of the Länder laying down an exemption for public casinos operators from Länder taxes and municipal taxes and introducing special taxes would in any event constitute a material and substantial alteration to the ‘existing’ tax regimes of public casinos operators (which would merely consist in the existing corporate tax and income tax exemption). The measure indeed transformed from a pure (non-functional) corporate and income tax exemption to a much more complex measure in which the newly introduced special taxes were meant to replace normal taxes from which the operators were exempted (not only corporate and income tax). Therefore, in the six West German Länder concerned, this alteration would in any event transform the potentially existing measures into new aid schemes and the entirety of the advantage arising from the schemes would, as from the alteration (which predates the beginning of the recovery period), constitute new aid.
4.3.2.1.2. In Länder where there were public casinos before the entry into force of the TFEU
(226) In the five remaining Western German Länder (Baden-Württemberg, Bavaria, Hesse, Rhineland-Palatinate, Schleswig-Holstein), according to the German authorities, the public casinos operators that have been active during the recovery period are exempted from Länder taxes and municipal taxes and subject to special taxes on the basis of laws of the Länder adopted after the entry into force of the TFEU (and before the beginning of the recovery period), as illustrated in Table 2.
Table 2
First provision laying down, in a general manner, the exemption from Länder taxes and municipal taxes and the main features of the special taxes in five Western German Länder
Baden-Württemberg
Law of 23.2.1995
Bavaria
Law of 26.7.1995
Hesse
Law of 21.12.1988
Rhineland-Palatinate
Law of 19.11.1985
Schleswig-Holstein
Ordinance (Verordnung) of 13.12.1994. Law of 29.12.1995
(227) However, there had already been public casinos and public casinos operators in these five Länder before the new provisions listed in Table 2 were adopted and before the entry into force of the TFEU. Those operators were already subject to special tax rules before the entry into force of the TFEU and those tax rules were thus existing measures at that time (1958). If the measures listed in table 2 constituted a mere continuation of the previously existing measures put into effect before the entry into force of the TFEU, they could be regarded as existing measures as the adoption of those measures would be regarded as a mere formal or administrative change, not an alteration. This is, however, not the case. As will be demonstrated below (recitals (228) to (236)), the new laws of the Länder introducing the generally applicable exemptions from municipal and Länder taxes and laying down the special taxes for public casinos operators (Table 2) were not alterations of purely formal nature; they did not simply replace equivalent‘existing’ provisions applicable to the existing operators.
(228) Firstly, these legal provisions replaced provisions laid down in contracts or ministerial decisions. Because taxes are usually a competence of the legislator, as is clear from the laws adopted in the 1970s, the corresponding earlier contracts or ministerial decisions enjoyed only a lower level of legal certainty. This change (increase) of the provisions’ level of legal certainty necessarily affects the substance of the previous measures and thus constitutes a material and non-severable alteration giving rise to new aid (for the entirety of the aid).
(229) Secondly, the measures existing before the entry into force of the TFEU had a different (temporal, personal and material) scope compared to the measures listed in Table 2 and cannot thus be regarded as the cause or origin of the special tax treatment of public casinos operators in these five Länder during the recovery period, as explained in recitals (230) to (235). This means that, if the new measures listed in Table 2 had not been adopted, there would be no legal basis for the special tax treatment of the public casinos operators during the recovery period.
(230) In most cases (Bavaria (162), Hesse, Rhineland-Palatinate for the public casino in Bad Dürkheim (163) and Schleswig-Holstein), Germany tried to allege that the exemption from entertainment tax existed before the entry into force of the TFEU, but it admitted that it was unable to retrieve the legal provisions (allegedly) exempting the existing public casinos operators from trade tax and entertainment tax and laying down the special taxes before the entry into force of the TFEU. There is no indication that the special tax rules (tax exemptions and special taxes) allegedly applicable before the entry into force of the TFEU were applicable (i) without time limit (or with an expiry date postdating the beginning of the recovery period), (ii) to any operator (164) (iii) for the operation of any casino and (iv) were laid down by law (legal certainty). There is thus no indication that the measures as they exist today (generally applicable to any operator and any casino without limit in time and laid down by law) are simply a continuation of measures existing before the entry into force of the TFEU. The evidence (actual provisions laying down the special tax treatment before the entry into force of the TFEU) existing in other cases (see recital (231)), rather shows that the special tax treatment of public casinos operators was (before the entry into force of the TFEU) laid down in concession contracts or ministerial decisions, mostly with a limited duration and covering only intuitu personae the specific concessionaire for a specific casino. The expiration of such measures after the entry into force of the TFEU and before the beginning of the recovery period is sufficient to conclude that, even in cases where fully fledged measures were put into effect (with their narrow material and time scope) before the entry into force of the TFEU, the provisions applicable for the whole recovery period are new measures (not the continuation of existing measures). There is thus no indication that the measures (generally applicable special taxes and exemptions from municipal and Länder taxes) were existing measures. They rather constitute newly created measures or alternatively, at the very least, material alterations to the previously existing measures, because they extended the material, personal and temporal scope of those previous measures and increased the level of legal certainty. As those measures were adopted before the beginning of the recovery period (see Table 2), any aid arising during the recovery period constitutes new aid in its entirety.
(231) In the remaining cases, the Commission assessed the legal basis laying down a special tax treatment at the time of entry into force of the TFEU.
(232) In Baden-Württemberg, the special tax rules (tax exemptions and special taxes) that existed before the entry into force of the TFEU were laid down only individually in ministerial decisions for one identified operator which ceased operating public casinos before the beginning of the recovery period (165). In addition, the special tax treatment for the casino in Konstanz was limited in time and expired in 1960 (166), before the beginning of the recovery period. As a consequence, the tax treatment of the public casinos operator(s) in Baden-Württemberg during the recovery period is a new measure and arises at the earliest from the 1995 law mentioned in Table 2.
(233) As regards the public casino in Bad Neuenahr (Rhineland-Palatinate), the special tax treatment existing before the entry into force of the TFEU for its operator was laid down only for a limited duration which expired long before the beginning of the recovery period (167). That measure thus cannot be the origin of the special tax treatment of the current operator of that public casino which rather arises at the earliest from the 1985 law mentioned in Table 2.
(234) In those cases, it is thus clear that the special tax treatment of public casinos operators during the recovery period originated from provisions adopted after the entry into force of the TFEU which did not constitute a mere continuation of measures put into effect before the entry into force of the TFEU. Even if it is true that Spielbank Baden-Baden GmbH & Co. KG and the operator in Bad Neuenahr were the only public casinos operators before 1958 in Baden-Württemberg and Rhineland-Palatinate respectively and that, as a consequence, (i) all operators were exempted from the normal taxes at that time and (ii) it was not necessary to lay down a generally applicable tax exemption, this does not change the fact that the only provisions existing before 1958 exempted, on the basis of mere ministerial decisions or contracts, only those specific operators (and for a limited time and only for the operation of certain casinos) and were not equivalent to a general exemption that could apply without limitation in time to other operators for any public casino, in particular all the operators active during the recovery period. In addition, even if, as argued by the Land Rhineland-Palatinate, the time-limited special tax treatment was regularly prolonged/renewed, each renewal (after the entry into force of the TFEU) constitutes a material alteration (of the time-limited duration) giving rise to a new measure. As a consequence, in those cases as well, any aid granted during the recovery period constitutes new aid in its entirety.
(235) These findings are summarised in Table 3.
Table 3
Special tax treatments existing before the entry into force of the TFEU and their evolution (in five Western German Länder where certain public casinos existed before the entry into force of the TFEU)
Baden-Württemberg
Existing measures laid down in 1955 (in a ministerial decision) for one specific operator (Spielbank Baden-Baden GmbH & Co KG) and one casino (in Baden-Baden) without limit in time. Those measures were repealed in 1995.
For the other existing casino (in Konstanz), that same operator was subject to a special tax treatment following a 1951 ministerial act which linked the tax treatment to the licence which expired in 1960.
The operator of both casinos stopped operations in 2003.
Bavaria
No legal provision before the entry into force of the TFEU (no indication that the existing measure would cover the public casinos operator(s) active during the recovery period and for all the casinos).
Hesse
No legal provision before the entry into force of the TFEU (no indication that the existing measure would cover the public casinos operator(s) active during the recovery period and for all the casinos).
Rhineland-Palatinate
– No legal provision before the entry into force of the TFEU for the (operator of the) public casino in Bad Dürkheim(no indication that the existing measure would cover the public casinos operator(s) active during the recovery period and for all the casinos).
– Existing special tax treatment (in a contract) for the (operator of the) public casino in Bad Neuenahr expired in 1962.
Schleswig-Holstein
No legal provision before the entry into force of the TFEU (no indication that the existing measure would cover the public casinos operator(s) active during the recovery period and for all the casinos).
(236) In conclusion, even if the special tax measures applicable to the existing public casinos operators in those five West German Länder (Baden-Württemberg, Bavaria, Hesse, Rhineland-Palatinate, Schleswig-Holstein) at the time of entry into force of the TFEU may have been existing measures at that time (1958), there was no continuity of those measures up to the special tax rules laid down in the laws on public casinos of the same Länder, which are, since before the recovery period, the basis of the special tax treatment applicable to the operators and public casinos concerned by the recovery period. The special tax rules laid down in the laws of the Länder on public casinos (which are the basis of the special tax treatment of public casinos operators during the recovery period) thus cannot be regarded as predating entry into force of the TFEU and are new measures since before the beginning of the recovery period. The aid they have provided during the recovery period is necessarily (and in its entirety) new aid. As an alternative reasoning, even if the new measure (covering the operators active during the recovery period) were regarded as an alteration of a pre-existing measure (by extending its personal, material and temporal scope), the Commission considers that all the aid awarded during the recovery period would precisely arise from that alteration (as the pre-existing measure did not cover the operators active during the recovery period) and would thus also constitute new aid.
4.3.2.2. Changes to the special taxes of public casinos operators after the entry into force of the TFEU
(237) A modification (a reduction but also an increase (168)) of the tax burden under the special tax rules (for instance via a change of the casino tax rate) constitutes an alteration if it is liable to affect the compatibility of the measures. A change of the special tax rules affects the amount of the advantage (169) and the amount of the advantage is a core feature of the compatibility assessment of the measures: it affects in particular the proportionality (see Section 4.4), the incentive effect and the appropriateness of the aid (170).
4.3.2.2.1. General reduction of the amount of casino tax by the VAT offsetting mechanism
(238) The introduction of the VAT offsetting mechanism did not materially modify the ‘existing’ measures, if any (see recital (119) of this Decision and Section 3.3.2.1.1. of the opening decision).
4.3.2.2.2. General reduction (or increase) of the rates and change of the structure of the special taxes
(239) The casino tax and other special taxes paid by public casinos operators constitute one of the main features of the tax schemes applicable to public casinos operators. In all Länder, the rates of these taxes were however materially and substantially modified (reduced and, in rare cases, increased) (171) and, in most Länder, also the structure of the tax was materially and substantially modified (introduction of progressivity, introduction of an additional tax on profit while the special taxes were previously levied on the GGI), as illustrated in Table 4.
Table 4
Reduction (or increase) of the casino tax rate (including other taxes on the GGI) and change of the overall tax structure
Baden-Württemberg
Law of 20.11.2012 (applicable as from 2010) (45-50 % + tax on profit, instead of 80 %)
Bavaria
Law of 29.4.1999 (50-70 %, instead of 80 %)
Law of 24.4.2001 (50-70 % – higher thresholds)
Law of 9.5.2006 (50-60 %)
Law of 14.4.2009 (35-40 %)
Law of 14.4.2011 (30-35 %)
Law of 24.5.2019 (25-30 %)
Berlin
Law of 8.2.1999 (80-91 %, instead of 85 % in East Berlin and 80 % in West Berlin)
Law of 3.3.2010 (applicable as form 1.1.2010) (40-50 % + tax on profit)
Brandenburg
Law of 22.4.2003 (60-80 %, instead of 85 %)
Law of 18.12.2007 (55-75 %)
Law of 28.6.2012 (25-45 %)
Bremen
Law of 18.12.2012 (applicable as from 1.1.2013) (40 %, instead of 80 %)
Hamburg
Law of 16.11.1999 (70-90 %, instead of 80 %-90 %)
Law of 23.5.2014 (55-80 % + tax on profit up to 10 % of the GGI)
Hesse
Law of 13.12.2017 (75 % + weitere Leistungen, instead of 80 % + weitere Leistungen)
Mecklenburg-Vorpommern
Law of 7.5.1996 (70-85 %, instead of 85 %)
Law of 5.7.2004 (50-80 % + tax on profit)
Law of 17.12.2009 (applicable as from 1.1.2007) (25-80 % + tax on profit)
Lower Saxony
Law of 25.6.2003 (applicable as from 1.9.2002) (80 %, instead of 70-88 %).
Law of 16.12.2004 (applicable as form 1.1.2005) (50-70 %).
Law of 27.8.2009 (applicable as from 1.1.2009) (0-75 % + tax on profit)
NRW
Law of 30.10.2007 (applicable as from 1.1.2008) (15-75 % + tax on profit, instead of 80 %)
Law of 13.11.2012 (applicable as from 1.1.2012) (45-55 % + tax on profit)
Rhineland-Palatinate
Law of 22.12.2015 (40-90 % + tax on profit, instead of 80 %)
Saarland
Law of 9.7.2003 (62-72 %, instead of 80 %).
Law of 5.5.2010 (52-62 %).
Law of 4.12.2013 (applicable as from 1.2.2014) (39-49 % + tax on profit).
Saxony
Law of 9.12.1993 (80 %, instead of 85 %)
Law of 11.12.2002 (50-70 %)
Law of 26.6.2009 (applicable as from 1.1.2007) (40-60 %)
Law of 14.6.2012 (35-55 %)
Saxony-Anhalt
Law of 26.6.1991 (80-92 %, instead of 85 %)
Law of 30.7.1997 (50-80 %)
Law of 30.8.2004 (70 %)
Law of 16.12.2009 (25-50 % + tax on profit)
Schleswig-Holstein
Finanzvertrag for the casino in Lübeck-Travemünde 1959 (80 %), 1964 (83 %), 1971 (85 %), 1972 (85.5 %).
Finanzvertrag for the casino in Westerland 1949 (80 %), 1966 (71-80 %), 1972 (72-82 %)
Law of 8.7.1976 (73-98-88 %)
Law of 14.6.1982 (73-88 %)
Law of 29.12.1995 (80 %)
Law of 8.10.2010 (40-55 % + tax on profit)
Law of 25.4.2012 (30-55 %, depending on the games)
Thuringia
Law of 10.5.1994 (80 %, instead of 85 %)
Law of 27.11.1997 (45-80 %)
Law of 29.3.2011 (25-60 % + tax on profit)
(240) Contrary to what is abstractly argued by the Land Hamburg, the fact that, after the changes, the casino tax rate may be the same as the pre-existing tax rate (‘up to 90 %’, before and after the changes), is not sufficient to consider that the change at stake is of a pure formal or administrative nature. Nothing ensures that this will be the case as this would depend on factual circumstances (in particular the level of GGI) which are not a feature of the scheme. Switching (as was the case in Hamburg in 1999) from a special tax system where the GGI is taxed at 80 % (with a mere possibility of an additional 10 %) to a special tax system where the GGI is taxed at 70 % (with a mere possibility of an additional 20 %) is an alteration, even if in both cases the maximum possible (hypothetical) rate is the same (90 %). Similarly, switching (as was the case in Hamburg in 2014) from a special tax system where the GGI is taxed at 70 % (with a mere possibility of an additional 20 %) to a special tax system where the GGI is taxed at 55 % rate (with a mere possibility of an additional 25 % and an additional tax on the profit capped at 10 % of the GGI) is an alteration even if in both cases the maximum possible (hypothetical) rate is the same (90 %). In addition, the change of design of the special taxes (the introduction of a tax, the tax base of which is the GGI instead of the profit) in any event constitutes a material alteration.
(241) The changes listed in Table 4 affect the constitutive features of the special taxes (affecting for instance the tax rate and/or the structure of the tax which became progressive). Those changes therefore constitute material alterations of any scheme potentially qualifying as an ‘existing’ scheme based on the recitals in Section 4.3 (172).
(242) The changes also affected the substance of the schemes themselves and the alteration is thus not severable. As highlighted by the German courts (173), the very high (around 80 %) rate of the casino tax existing before such changes was deemed appropriate to cream off the profits of the public casinos operators, in line with the objective of the special tax rules. Therefore, a reduction of that rate, without any link or reference to the normal tax rules, has the potential to change the very nature and objective (and thus the substance) of the special tax schemes by turning a likely disadvantage (very high tax rate leading to a higher tax burden than under the normal rules) into an advantage. A change in the tax burden under the special tax rules – in the absence of any safeguard that the taxation will not be lower than under the normal tax rules – also endangers the ‘replacement’ and ‘skimming’ logic of the special tax treatment and thus the objectives assigned to it. In addition, in cases where the special tax regime of public casinos did not lead in the past to actual advantages in particular because the casino tax rate remained high, the materialisation of an actual advantage (during the recovery period) after a general reduction of the special taxes would necessarily mean that the alteration (the general reduction of the special taxes) affected the ‘replacement’ objective of the special tax treatment and thus its substance.
(243) As the substance of the schemes is affected, the entirety of the advantage arising from the schemes constitutes new aid. Any actual advantage for public casinos operators arising after these changes (174) constitutes new aid, whatever the qualification (as existing or new) of the special tax rules as they existed before the alteration.
(244) It is true that, as argued by the Land Rhineland-Palatinate, some of the normal taxes (for example the corporate tax rate) were also reduced over time. However, the Commission considers that this is not sufficient to claim that the two tax systems evolved ‘in parallel’ as claimed by the Land: reductions in the special taxes were not motivated by a parallel decrease in the normal taxes; and the evolution of the normal tax rules, especially trade tax and corporate tax, which concern all undertakings, was never motivated by a parallel evolution of the special taxes which only concern public casinos operators. This is also evidenced by the fact that the special tax rules evolved on different paths (and different times) in the different Länder while the changes under the normal tax rules (especially the corporate tax reduction mentioned by the Land Rhineland-Palatinate) applied uniformly at national level or were defined at municipal level (for changes in the trade tax rate or the entertainment tax). In addition, because there is no automatic mechanism to ensure that the special tax rules lead to the same tax burden as under the normal tax rules, no precise comparison between the two sets of tax rules could be carried out and it was thus from the outset not even possible to modify one set of tax rules to (exactly) follow the evolutions of the other set of tax rules. The Land Rhineland-Palatinate itself acknowledges that the temporal evolution of the entertainment tax cannot be precisely described and thus implicitly acknowledges that the two tax systems could not evolve in parallel.
(245) Even if the two tax regimes evolved in parallel, it would in any event be incorrect to consider that those changes in both sets of tax rules would not be material alterations because they would not lead to a difference in the tax burden. Even if they would not lead to an (additional) advantage, parallel reductions in the tax burden under the normal and the special tax rules are to be regarded as material alterations because they actually change the tax burden to be paid by the operators at stake. In addition, a reduction in the tax burden under the special tax rules, if only motivated by a parallel reduction of the normal taxes, would disregard the skimming logic of the special tax rules (which should be achieved whatever the level of the tax burden under the normal tax rules) and thus their own objective and substance.
(246) The material and substantial alterations arising from the modification of the rates of the special taxes and from the changes to the structure of the special taxes give rise to new aid as from the alteration (and for the entirety of the advantage, see recitals (242) and (243)). This applies in East Berlin and Saxony where the special tax schemes were, before that alteration, existing measures put into effect before the entry into force of the TFEU. In the other cases (Brandenburg, Mecklenburg-Vorpommern, Saxony-Anhalt and Thuringia and all West German Länder), these substantial alterations serve as an alternative reasoning that there is new aid in any event, that is in addition to the main line of reasoning that the special tax treatment of the public casinos operators active during the recovery period in these Länder is based on new measures (see recitals (213) and (214) for the East German Länder and Sections 4.3.1.2 and 4.3.2.1 for the West German Länder).
4.3.2.2.3. Temporary ad hoc reduction of the special taxes in certain circumstances
(247) Moreover, the amount of casino tax (or other special taxes) is or was, in certain Länder, reduced in certain circumstances (see measures 2.a, 2.b, 4.b and 4.c, as defined in Section 3.1.4.4 and Annexes 1, 2A and 2B of the opening decision). The laws introducing such tax reductions and the corresponding ad hoc decisions reducing the tax burden under the special tax rules were also adopted after the entry into force of the TFEU (175). They also constitute substantial alterations to the measures put into effect before the entry into force of the TFEU (if any) and these substantial alterations give rise to new aid as from the alteration and for the entirety of the advantage for the same reasons as for the general reductions (see recital (242)).
4.3.2.3. Introduction, after the entry into force of the TFEU, of a new (normal) tax from which all public casinos operators in all
Länder
are exempted
(248) According to the German authorities, the exemption from income taxes laid down by Article 6(1) of the 1938 law, as interpreted by the 1954 ‘administrative agreement’ (Verwaltungsabkommen), covers surcharges related to corporate tax and income tax. The solidarity surcharge (Solidaritätszuschlag), introduced in 1991 (before the beginning of the recovery period), constitutes such a surcharge. Public casinos operators in all Länder are thus exempted from the solidarity surcharge based on Article 6(1) of the 1938 law. However, according to the case-law of the Court of Justice (176), since the tax was introduced after the entry into force of the TFEU, the corresponding exemption (in each Land) is a ‘new’ measure. The introduction of the new normal tax constitutes a material and substantial alteration to the pre-existing measures.
(249) Such an alteration would transform ‘existing’ schemes (that is schemes predating entry into force of the TFEU which have not been altered since that date), if any, into new aid schemes. By analogy to the reasoning mentioned in recital (242), an increase in the tax burden under the normal tax rules (as resulted from the introduction of the solidarity surcharge in 1991) – without any link to the special tax rules and without a parallel change in the special tax rules – endangers the replacement objective of the special tax rules and thus the intrinsic functioning of the measures and their substance. As a consequence, the entirety of the advantage arising from the schemes as from the alteration (which predates the beginning of the recovery period) constitutes new aid.
4.3.3. Conclusion on the qualification as existing aid or new aid
(250) Any aid arising from the special tax schemes applicable to the public casinos operators in each Land, during the recovery period, constitutes new aid for the cumulative reasons mentioned in Sections 4.3.1.1, 4.3.1.2, 4.3.2.1, 4.3.2.2.2 and 4.3.2.2.3. As that aid was not notified to the Commission, it constitutes unlawful aid.
4.4. Compatibility of the aid measures
(251) The measures, to the extent they are aid (‘the aid measures’), qualify as operating aid, as they are not linked to any specific investment or project. Operating aid that merely diminishes the normal costs of an undertaking cannot be regarded as compatible with the internal market (177).
(252) The German federal authorities merely submitted that the measures pursue an objective of general interest (by referring to their arguments about the public mission carried out by public casinos operators), are necessary, appropriate and proportionate. SHSWSN also vaguely argued that the aid would be compatible following the reasoning made by the Commission in the Decision of 20 September 2011 concerning the duties for online gaming in Denmark (178), because the aid would aim at ensuring player protection.
(253) While it is up to the Member State to explain in detail why the measures are compatible with the internal market, the German authorities did not further support their claims and did not explain on which legal basis the measures could be regarded as compatible. SHSWSN also did not provide any precise explanation as to why the measures would be necessary, appropriate and proportionate.
(254) In general, because of the absence of reference to certain costs, the absence of limit to the amount of aid (advantage) and the lack of even basic information about the amount of aid (in the absence of information on the tax burden under the normal tax rules), the aid cannot be found to be proportionate and transparent, which are general requirements for a measure to be regarded as compatible with the internal market. It is thus also not comparable to the situation covered by the Commission Decision of 20 September 2011 which, in particular, found the aid to be proportionate and appropriate in the light of several economic studies showing that the reduced rate of gambling duty applicable to online games was set at the appropriate level (the rate could not have been higher – limiting the advantage – as this would have prevented operators to enter the legal market while this was precisely the objective of the measure). Also, the Commission’s decision-making practice in other cases cannot affect the legality of a decision, which can be assessed only in the light of the objective rules of the TFEU.
(255) The overall argumentation of the German authorities and, in particular, the alleged objective of the measures (to allow the public casinos operators to maintain their operations because they would perform a public task), seem to refer implicitly to Article 107(3), point (c), TFEU (aid to facilitate the development of certain economic activities) and Article 106(2) TFEU.
(256) As already underlined, the measures are operating aid and bear no link to any costs (investment costs or even operating costs). Operating aid cannot, in principle, satisfy the conditions for the application of Article 107(3), point (c), TFEU as such aid, given that it does no more than maintain an existing situation or lower the usual ongoing operating expenditure which an undertaking would have had to bear in any event in the course of its normal business, cannot be regarded as being intended to facilitate the development of an economic activity and is such as to affect trading conditions adversely to an extent contrary to the common interest (179). In addition, Germany did not even argue that the operating aids in question would be equivalent to investment aid and it is indeed not the case for the measures, as the operating aids are not related to any investment of the beneficiaries. Furthermore, the amount of the advantage provided by the schemes is a priori not limited and cannot be proportionate and limited to the minimum necessary to prevent undue distortions of competition and effects on trade. The aid thus cannot be compatible under Article 107(3), point (c), TFEU.
(257) As already argued (see Section 4.2.5.2.2), the activities of public casinos cannot be regarded as clearly defined services of general economic interest. Furthermore, there is no mechanism for ensuring that the aid at stake would be limited and no entrustment act specifying the methods of calculating the compensation. Thus, even assuming that public casinos operators would carry out a genuine service of general economic interest (which the Commission disputes), nothing ensures that the compensation granted for the provision of such a service does not exceed what is necessary to cover the net cost of discharging the public service obligations (180). The aid thus cannot be compatible under Article 106(2) TFEU.
(258) One public casinos operator (SBN) considers that Article 107(3), point (b), TFEU would be the compatibility basis for a possible State aid. The compatibility criteria applicable in such cases have been laid down in the Communication from the Commission — Criteria for the analysis of the compatibility with the internal market of State aid to promote the execution of important projects of common European interest (181). The measures do not concern a ‘project’ within the meaning of the criteria laid down in paragraphs 12 and 13 of that Communication. They also do not concern a project of ‘common European interest’ because they do not involve several Member States as required by the criteria laid down in paragraph 16 of the Communication.
(259) The measures’ lack of proportionality (a general compatibility requirement) would thus in any event make the aid incompatible, whatever legal basis is used for the compatibility assessment.
(260) In the light of the foregoing, the aid measures are not compatible with the internal market.
5. IMPLEMENTATION AND RECOVERY
(261) According to the TFEU and the established case-law of the Court of Justice, the Commission is competent to decide that the Member State concerned shall alter or abolish aid that is found to be incompatible with the internal market (182).
(262) As the measures constitute unlawful and incompatible State aid (except the measure in place – as from 1 January 2024 –– in the Land Hamburg), the German authorities should put an end to these aid schemes (for example by abolishing the special tax rules or by otherwise ensuring that they do not provide an advantage). The German authorities should inform the Commission services within four months following the date of notification of this Decision of the measures taken. The amended tax rules shall apply at the latest with effect from the tax year following the notification of this Decision (see recital (269)).
(263) The Court of Justice has also consistently held that the obligation on a Member State to abolish aid regarded by the Commission as being incompatible with the internal market is designed to re-establish the previously existing situation (183). In this context, the Court of Justice has established that this objective is attained once the recipient has repaid the amounts granted by way of unlawful aid, thus forfeiting the advantage which it had enjoyed over its competitors on the internal market, and the situation prior to the payment of the aid is restored (184).
(264) In line with the case-law of the Court of Justice, Article 16(1) of Regulation (EU) 2015/1589 states that ‘where negative decisions are taken in cases of unlawful aid, the Commission shall decide that the Member State concerned shall take all necessary measures to recover the aid from the beneficiary’.
(265) Thus, given that the aid measures in question were implemented in breach of Article 108(3), TFEU (they were not notified to the Commission), and are to be considered as unlawful and incompatible aid, they should be recovered in order to re-establish the situation that existed on the internal market prior to their granting. Recovery should cover the time period from the date when the aid was put at the disposal of the beneficiaries, that is the date on which the normal taxes should have been paid, until effective recovery. The amount to be recovered should bear interest from the date on which it was put at the disposal of the beneficiaries until effective recovery. The interest should be calculated on a compound basis in accordance with Chapter V of Regulation (EC) No 794/2004.
(266) According to Article 17(1) of Regulation (EU) 2015/1589, the powers of the Commission to recover aid are subject to a limitation period of ten years. According to Article 17(2) of that Regulation, the limitation period is to begin on the day on which the unlawful aid is awarded to the beneficiary. Any action taken by the Commission or by a Member State, acting at the request of the Commission, with regard to the unlawful aid interrupts the limitation period. Consequently, the decisive factor in determining the starting point of the limitation period referred to in Article 17 is when the aid was in fact awarded. That provision refers to the award of aid to a beneficiary, not the date on which an aid scheme was adopted. In the case of a scheme entailing advantages granted on a periodic basis (which is the case here for the measures), there may be a considerable period between the date on which an act forming the legal basis of the aid is adopted and the date on which the undertakings concerned will actually be granted the aid. In such a case, for the purpose of calculating the limitation period, the aid must be regarded as not having been awarded to the beneficiary until the date on which it was in fact received by the beneficiary (185). Therefore, the limitation period starts to run each year on the date on which the normal taxes were due, although the act forming the legal basis of the aid may have been adopted before that date.
(267) The obligation on Germany to recover the aid will therefore cover the ten years preceding the date on which the Commission first asked Germany for information on the aid measures. As the first information request was sent on 8 March 2017, the recovery starts with the 2007 taxation year. Thus, only aid awarded under the aid schemes after 8 March 2007 can be regarded as new aid that can be recovered.
(268) The amount of the aid to be recovered consists of the positive difference between the amount of tax that the public casinos operators would have paid under the normal tax rules and the amount of tax that they actually paid under the special tax rules, taking into account the effect of all measures (including the ad hoc reductions of the special taxes) and cumulated over the whole recovery period. Given that, under the special tax rules, an operator may have benefitted from advantages and suffered from disadvantages depending on the tax years and specific circumstances, the actual advantage to be recovered should be the positive sum (if any) of these (positive and negative) amounts, including recovery interests. This will ensure recovery of the advantage actually provided by the measures over the recovery period. This methodology is justified in this specific case given the reasoning used in the State aid assessment of the schemes (the existence of a ‘potential advantage’, while its materialisation is examined in the recovery phase). Furthermore, Germany put forward arguments based on national tax law (normal tax rules) justifying such a global approach across tax years instead of a yearly approach in this particular case where the measures can lead to advantages and disadvantages: Germany in particular mentioned the possibility of carrying the losses of one particular tax year to another tax year (carry forward and/or carry back) for taxes on profit (186), as well as depreciations and provisions (Abschreibungen und Rücklagen), i.e. mechanisms which allow compensating profits and losses and spreading the tax burden over several years. In the same vein, Germany explained that German tax law enables the offsetting of tax debt across calendar years (187). This approach also appears in line with the consideration that intrinsically linked measures having various effects should be assessed globally, taking into account related disadvantages (188). This implies that recovery should take into account the same perspective, not restricted to individual tax years seen as independent from one another.
(269) In general, Germany must implement recovery effectively and immediately in accordance with Article 16(2) and (3) of Regulation (EU) 2015/1589. As the measures are tax measures involving at least to some extent annual taxes, this assessment can only be done, for a particular tax year, after that tax year has elapsed. Therefore, the assessment for the tax year during which the Decision is adopted (‘the current tax year’) should take place after that tax year has elapsed.
(270) In order to determine the tax burden under the normal tax rules, the German authorities should apply usual corporate tax, income tax (and related additional taxes), trade tax and entertainment tax rules.
(271) In particular, in order to calculate the amount of entertainment tax due by public casinos operators, it should be kept in mind that, most of the time, municipal entertainment tax laws were not specifically designed to apply to public casinos and the games they offer because of the tax exemption applicable to public casinos in the laws of the Länder on public casinos. The cities (189) thus never had the occasion in the recent past to make use of their competence to tax public casinos. This means that the authorities competent to lay down the main features of the entertainment tax should place themselves in the situation which would have existed in the absence of the measures examined in the present decision. In the absence of the exemption from entertainment tax (and in the absence of the special taxes), the cities would have had to decide how to tax these entertainment activities (without being able to argue – by definition – that they cannot tax them because of the existing exemptions). In doing so, the cities should in particular comply with the general principles of Union and German law (such as the non-discrimination principle) and the specific principles of taxation under the entertainment tax. The German authorities are thus invited, within four months following notification of this Decision, to submit the appropriate way to calculate the entertainment tax applicable to public casinos in the different cities. In that regard, the following considerations should guide the German authorities.
(272) The entertainment tax should be applied using the most appropriate triggering event in the light of the objective of the tax and, if any, of the specificities of the games offered by public casinos. This means in particular that, given the similarity between the games offered by public casinos and the games offered by gambling halls (190), the cities should tax all those games of chance in a similar manner. Thus, the gambling activities of public casinos operator (gambling machines, and table games, if any) should in principle be taxed using the features (tax base and tax rate) laid down by each municipal entertainment tax law for the taxation of gambling machines in gambling halls, unless the entertainment tax law of the city in question lays down a more specific or appropriate method to calculate the tax for table games (191).
(273) In addition, it could be that certain cities intend or decide to levy the entertainment tax in the form of a tax on the bets placed by the players (Spieleinsatz/Spieleraufwand), as a few cities did in respect of gambling machines in gambling halls. In such a case, the cities should duly take into account the specificity of the public casinos in terms of pay-out, as they did when they introduced an entertainment tax on bets for gambling halls (192).
(274) For simplification purposes, when calculating the amount of entertainment tax that would have been due by public casinos operators, the German authorities could decide to apply a rate of 25 % of the GGI, which would in principle constitute the highest possible level of entertainment tax that can be imposed on public casinos operators (193). The German authorities can alternatively decide to carry out more refined calculations using the concrete entertainment tax rates applicable in the relevant municipalities, in order to determine the precise amount of entertainment tax.
(275) In any case, as already underlined (see recital (271)), the calculation method chosen by the cities should be based on credible documentation and comply with the general principles of Union and German law (such as the non-discrimination principle) and the specific principles of taxation under the entertainment tax. The German authorities are invited to provide, within four months following the notification of this Decision, the explanations on the calculation method in an appropriate and streamlined format, specifying the reasoning for the chosen method in order to enable the Commission services to verify it. Within six months following the notification of this Decision, Germany should submit the precise calculations covering the time period until the end of the tax year preceding the notification of this Decision and establish, based on those calculations, the exact amount of aid to be recovered including recovery interest.
(276) In response to the fact (alleged by the Land Hamburg) that the operators would have behaved differently under different tax rules (the normal tax rules), so that no comparison can be made, it is appropriate to highlight that, pursuant to the case-law, aid subject to recovery should not take into account hypothetical elements such as the choices, often numerous, which could have been made by the beneficiaries, since the choices actually made with the aid might prove to be irreversible (194).
(277) Some public casinos operators (SHSWSN) argue that recovery should in this case be prohibited because (i) it is contrary to the protection of legitimate expectations of the beneficiaries which always paid their taxes, (ii) the special tax rules exist since 1938 and (iii) ordering recovery would endanger the public task carried out by public casinos operators.
(278) However, in view of the fundamental role played by the notification obligation to render effective the review of State aid by the Commission, which is mandatory, the recipients of aid may not, in principle, entertain a legitimate expectation that the aid is lawful unless it has been granted in compliance with the procedure provided for in Article 108 TFEU and a diligent business operator must normally be in a position to confirm that that procedure has been followed (195). The measures were however not notified to the Commission and therefore not approved by the Commission. In addition, the fact that the special tax rules existed since 1938 aims at arguing that the measure is existing aid, which has been rebutted in Section 4.3. Furthermore, the operators at stake do not explain why ordering recovery of an undue competitive advantage would endanger the public task they allegedly (recital (128)) carry out and why it would constitute a violation of a fundamental principle of Union law.
(279) During the formal investigation procedure, Germany explained that the calculations necessary to carry out recovery are complex and rely on figures dating back to 2007 in some instances; besides, the data would not be easily available (some operators have left the market, while some data disappeared as a consequence of the 2021 floods in Rhineland-Palatinate). The German authorities also argue that, to receive the relevant data, they have to rely on the cooperation of the beneficiaries (public casinos operators) who might be hesitant to provide it in the context of a recovery case. They suggest a time period of 18 months to implement the recovery decision.
(280) It cannot be ruled out that, in implementing the complex calculation methodology described in recitals (268) to (274), Germany may need additional time (compared to the usual practice) to establish the amounts to be recovered. In line with the Commission Notice on the recovery of unlawful and incompatible State aid (196), with respect to the timing for the recovery from individual beneficiaries of the unlawful and incompatible State aid amounts, the German authorities should have four months starting from the date of the end of the current tax year to establish the final aid amounts to be recovered and six months starting from that same date to actually implement the recovery. These deadlines accommodate the fact, mentioned in recital (269), that the assessment for the current tax year can only be done after that tax year has elapsed.
6. CONCLUSION
(281) The Commission finds that Germany has unlawfully implemented the aid measures in question in breach of Article 108(3) of the TFEU. The aid measures are not compatible with the internal market. Consequently, Germany must put an end to those aid measures and recover from the public casinos operators the difference between the amount of tax that they would have paid under the normal tax rules and the amount of tax that they actually paid under the special tax rules.
HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
1. The 16 special tax schemes applicable to public casinos operators in the 16 German Länder (as described in Section 4.1 of the recitals) constitute State aid schemes unlawfully put into effect by Germany in breach of Article 108(3) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union. The aid granted under those aid schemes is incompatible with the internal market.

2. By way of derogation from paragraph 1, the scheme applicable to public casinos operators as from 1 January 2024 in the Land Hamburg (Law of 24 May 1976 allowing a public casino, amended by the law of 21 December 2023) does not constitute State aid.

1. Germany shall recover the incompatible aid granted under the aid schemes referred to in Article 1 from the beneficiaries.

2. Individual aid granted under the aid schemes referred to in Article 1 which, at the time it is granted, fulfils the conditions laid down by a Regulation adopted pursuant to Article 1 of Council Regulation (EU) 2015/1588 (197) or pursuant to Article 1 of Council Regulation (EC) No 994/98 (198) or by any other approved aid scheme is compatible with the internal market.

3. The sums to be recovered shall bear interest from the date on which they were put at the disposal of the beneficiaries until their actual recovery.

4. The interest shall be calculated on a compound basis in accordance with Chapter V of Regulation (EC) No 794/2004.
5. Germany shall abolish the incompatible aid schemes within four months following the date of notification of this Decision. The amended tax schemes shall apply at the latest with effect from the tax year following the notification of this Decision.

1. Recovery of the aid granted under the aid schemes referred to in Article 1 shall be immediate and effective.

2. Germany shall ensure that recovery is implemented within six months from the date on which the current tax year elapsed.

1. Within four months following notification of this Decision, Germany shall submit a detailed description of measures already taken and planned to comply with this Decision and in particular to ensure that the aid measures are abolished. Germany shall in particular submit the following information:
(a) a detailed description of the measures taken to put an end to the aid schemes;
(b) detailed explanations on the calculation methodology chosen to establish the entertainment tax.

2. Within six months following the notification of this Decision, Germany shall submit the following information:
(a) calculations of the amount of aid received under the aid schemes referred to in Article 1 by each of the beneficiaries until the end of the tax year preceding the notification of this Decision;
(b) calculations of the amount (principal and recovery interests) to be recovered until the end of the tax year preceding the notification of this Decision.

3. Within four months starting from the date on which the current tax year elapsed, Germany shall submit the following information:
(a) the total and final amount of aid received by each of the beneficiaries under the schemes (including the current tax year);
(b) the total amount (principal and recovery interests) to be recovered from each beneficiary;
(c) documents demonstrating that the beneficiaries have been ordered to repay the aid.

4. Germany shall keep the Commission informed of the progress of the national measures taken to implement this Decision until recovery of the aid granted under the schemes referred to in Article 1 has been completed. It shall immediately submit, on simple request by the Commission, information on the measures already taken and planned to comply with this Decision. It shall also provide detailed information concerning the amounts of aid and recovery interest already recovered from the beneficiaries.

This Decision is addressed to the Federal Republic of Germany.

Council Decision of 22 May 2025 amending Decision (EU) 2023/133 as regards the replacement of a member of the selection panel provided for in Article 14(3) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1939

Official Journalof the European Union ENC series
C/2025/3131 3.6.2025
(1) The European Public Prosecutor’s Office (‘EPPO’) was established by Regulation (EU) 2017/1939. The College of the EPPO consists of the European Chief Prosecutor and one European Prosecutor per Member State. The European Chief Prosecutor is appointed by common accord of the European Parliament and the Council from among a shortlist of qualified candidates drawn up by the selection panel provided for in Article 14(3) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1939 (the ‘selection panel’). The European Prosecutors are appointed by the Council from among three qualified candidates nominated by each Member State, after having received a reasoned opinion from the selection panel.
(2) The current members of the selection panel were appointed for a period of four years from 20 January 2023 by means of Council Decision (EU) 2023/133(2). One member of the selection panel was replaced in June 2024 by Council Decision (EU) 2024/1777(3).
(3) On 7 March 2025, one member of the selection panel, Ms Tuire TAMMINIEMI, resigned. The Council was informed accordingly.
(4) A new member of the selection panel should be appointed as soon as possible to replace Ms Tuire TAMMINIEMI, in order to ensure the continuity of the selection panel’s activities.
(5) The Commission, taking into account the need for geographical balance, gender balance and due representation of the legal systems of the Member States participating in the enhanced cooperation on the establishment of the EPPO, proposed Ms Johanna HERVONEN, Chief Prosecutor of the prosecution district of Southern Finland, as a new member of the selection panel.
(6) Ms Johanna HERVONEN should therefore be appointed as a new member of the selection panel and, in accordance with Rule II of the operating rules of the selection panel set out in the Annex to Council Implementing Decision (EU) 2018/1696(4), her appointment should be for the remainder of her predecessor’s term of office.
(7) Decision (EU) 2023/133 should therefore be amended accordingly.
(8) In order to ensure that Ms Johanna HERVONEN can swiftly take up her functions and participate in the ongoing activities of the selection panel, this Decision should enter into force on the day following that of its publication in theOfficial Journal of the European Union,
THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,
Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EU) 2017/1939 of 12 October 2017 implementing enhanced cooperation on the establishment of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office (‘the EPPO’)(1), and in particular Article 14(3) thereof,
Having regard to the proposal from the European Commission,
(1) The European Public Prosecutor’s Office (‘EPPO’) was established by Regulation (EU) 2017/1939. The College of the EPPO consists of the European Chief Prosecutor and one European Prosecutor per Member State. The European Chief Prosecutor is appointed by common accord of the European Parliament and the Council from among a shortlist of qualified candidates drawn up by the selection panel provided for in Article 14(3) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1939 (the ‘selection panel’). The European Prosecutors are appointed by the Council from among three qualified candidates nominated by each Member State, after having received a reasoned opinion from the selection panel.
(2) The current members of the selection panel were appointed for a period of four years from 20 January 2023 by means of Council Decision (EU) 2023/133(2). One member of the selection panel was replaced in June 2024 by Council Decision (EU) 2024/1777(3).
(3) On 7 March 2025, one member of the selection panel, Ms Tuire TAMMINIEMI, resigned. The Council was informed accordingly.
(4) A new member of the selection panel should be appointed as soon as possible to replace Ms Tuire TAMMINIEMI, in order to ensure the continuity of the selection panel’s activities.
(5) The Commission, taking into account the need for geographical balance, gender balance and due representation of the legal systems of the Member States participating in the enhanced cooperation on the establishment of the EPPO, proposed Ms Johanna HERVONEN, Chief Prosecutor of the prosecution district of Southern Finland, as a new member of the selection panel.
(6) Ms Johanna HERVONEN should therefore be appointed as a new member of the selection panel and, in accordance with Rule II of the operating rules of the selection panel set out in the Annex to Council Implementing Decision (EU) 2018/1696(4), her appointment should be for the remainder of her predecessor’s term of office.
(7) Decision (EU) 2023/133 should therefore be amended accordingly.
(8) In order to ensure that Ms Johanna HERVONEN can swiftly take up her functions and participate in the ongoing activities of the selection panel, this Decision should enter into force on the day following that of its publication in theOfficial Journal of the European Union,
HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:

Article 1
In Article 1 of Decision (EU) 2023/133, the name ‘Ms Tuire TAMMINIEMI’ is replaced by the name ‘Ms Johanna HERVONEN’.

Article 2
This Decision shall enter into force on the day following that of its publication in theOfficial Journal of the European Union.

THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,
Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EU) 2017/1939 of 12 October 2017 implementing enhanced cooperation on the establishment of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office (‘the EPPO’)(1), and in particular Article 14(3) thereof,
Having regard to the proposal from the European Commission,
(1) The European Public Prosecutor’s Office (‘EPPO’) was established by Regulation (EU) 2017/1939. The College of the EPPO consists of the European Chief Prosecutor and one European Prosecutor per Member State. The European Chief Prosecutor is appointed by common accord of the European Parliament and the Council from among a shortlist of qualified candidates drawn up by the selection panel provided for in Article 14(3) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1939 (the ‘selection panel’). The European Prosecutors are appointed by the Council from among three qualified candidates nominated by each Member State, after having received a reasoned opinion from the selection panel.
(2) The current members of the selection panel were appointed for a period of four years from 20 January 2023 by means of Council Decision (EU) 2023/133(2). One member of the selection panel was replaced in June 2024 by Council Decision (EU) 2024/1777(3).
(3) On 7 March 2025, one member of the selection panel, Ms Tuire TAMMINIEMI, resigned. The Council was informed accordingly.
(4) A new member of the selection panel should be appointed as soon as possible to replace Ms Tuire TAMMINIEMI, in order to ensure the continuity of the selection panel’s activities.
(5) The Commission, taking into account the need for geographical balance, gender balance and due representation of the legal systems of the Member States participating in the enhanced cooperation on the establishment of the EPPO, proposed Ms Johanna HERVONEN, Chief Prosecutor of the prosecution district of Southern Finland, as a new member of the selection panel.
(6) Ms Johanna HERVONEN should therefore be appointed as a new member of the selection panel and, in accordance with Rule II of the operating rules of the selection panel set out in the Annex to Council Implementing Decision (EU) 2018/1696(4), her appointment should be for the remainder of her predecessor’s term of office.
(7) Decision (EU) 2023/133 should therefore be amended accordingly.
(8) In order to ensure that Ms Johanna HERVONEN can swiftly take up her functions and participate in the ongoing activities of the selection panel, this Decision should enter into force on the day following that of its publication in theOfficial Journal of the European Union,
HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
In Article 1 of Decision (EU) 2023/133, the name ‘Ms Tuire TAMMINIEMI’ is replaced by the name ‘Ms Johanna HERVONEN’.
This Decision shall enter into force on the day following that of its publication in theOfficial Journal of the European Union.

Council Decision of 27 May 2025 appointing two members of the committee of independent eminent persons pursuant to Article 11(1) of Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 1141/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council on the statute and funding of European political parties and European political foundations

Official Journalof the European Union ENC series
C/2025/3139 3.6.2025
(1) Article 11(1) of Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 1141/2014 establishes a committee of independent eminent persons (the ‘committee’).
(2) Article 11(1) of Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 1141/2014 provides that the committee is to consist of six members, with the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission each appointing two members. The committee is to be renewed within six months after the end of the first session of the European Parliament following each election to the European Parliament. The mandate of the members is not to be renewable,
— Mr Linas KONTRIMAS,
— Ms Pia LANGE.
THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,
Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Atomic Energy Community,
Having regard to Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 1141/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 October 2014 on the statute and funding of European political parties and European political foundations(1), and in particular Article 11(1) thereof,
(1) Article 11(1) of Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 1141/2014 establishes a committee of independent eminent persons (the ‘committee’).
(2) Article 11(1) of Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 1141/2014 provides that the committee is to consist of six members, with the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission each appointing two members. The committee is to be renewed within six months after the end of the first session of the European Parliament following each election to the European Parliament. The mandate of the members is not to be renewable,
HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:

Article 1
1. The following are hereby appointed as members of the committee of independent eminent persons for the duration of the term of that committee:
—
Mr Linas KONTRIMAS,
—
Ms Pia LANGE.
2. Each appointment is subject to the signing, by the relevant designated member, of the declaration of independence and absence of conflict of interests that is annexed to this Decision.

Article 2
This Decision shall enter into force on the day following that of its publication in theOfficial Journal of the European Union.

THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,
Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Atomic Energy Community,
Having regard to Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 1141/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 October 2014 on the statute and funding of European political parties and European political foundations(1), and in particular Article 11(1) thereof,
(1) Article 11(1) of Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 1141/2014 establishes a committee of independent eminent persons (the ‘committee’).
(2) Article 11(1) of Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 1141/2014 provides that the committee is to consist of six members, with the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission each appointing two members. The committee is to be renewed within six months after the end of the first session of the European Parliament following each election to the European Parliament. The mandate of the members is not to be renewable,
HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
1. The following are hereby appointed as members of the committee of independent eminent persons for the duration of the term of that committee:
—
Mr Linas KONTRIMAS,
—
Ms Pia LANGE.
2. Each appointment is subject to the signing, by the relevant designated member, of the declaration of independence and absence of conflict of interests that is annexed to this Decision.
This Decision shall enter into force on the day following that of its publication in theOfficial Journal of the European Union.
ANNEXDECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE AND ABSENCE OF CONFLICT OF INTERESTSI, the undersigned, ………………………………, declare that I have taken note of Article 11(1) of Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 1141/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council on the statute and funding of European political parties and European political foundations and will exercise my duties as member of the committee of independent eminent persons fully independently and in full compliance with the rules of that Regulation.
I will neither seek nor take instructions from any institution or government, or from any other body, office or agency. I will refrain from any act which is incompatible with the nature of my duties.
I declare, to the best of my knowledge, that I am not in a situation of conflict of interests. A conflict of interests exists where the impartial and objective exercise of my duties as member of the committee of independent eminent persons is compromised for reasons involving family, personal life, political, national, philosophical or religious affinity, economic interest or any other shared interest with a recipient.
In particular, I declare that I am not a member of the European Parliament, the Council or the Commission. I do not hold any electoral mandate. I am not an official or other servant of the European Union. I am not, and never have been, an employee of a European political party or of a European political foundation.

Done at …, …
[DATE + SIGNATURE
of the designated member of the committee
of independent eminent persons]

Commission Implementing Decision (EU) 2025/315 of 14 February 2025 establishing a template for the notification of the temporary reintroduction or prolongation of border control at internal borders

Official Journalof the European Union ENL series
2025/315 17.2.2025
(1) The establishment of an area where persons are free to move without internal borders is one of the main achievements of the Union. Therefore, the reintroduction of border control at internal borders should remain an exception and should only be a measure of last resort.
(2) Regulation (EU) 2016/399 obliges Member States to duly notify any decision to reintroduce such border control to the Commission, the Parliament and the Council.
(3) The Commission is to adopt an implementing act to establish a template for notifications by Member States of the reintroduction or prolongation of border control at internal borders.
(4) The template should include all elements that Member States are required to provide under Regulation (EU) 2016/399 to allow the Commission to assess compliance with the criteria and conditions for a temporary reintroduction of border control at internal borders.
(5) In accordance with Articles 1 and 2 of Protocol No 22 on the position of Denmark, annexed to the Treaty on European Union and to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, Denmark did not take part in the adoption of Regulation (EU) 2024/1717 of the European Parliament and of the Council(2)amending Regulation (EU) 2016/399 and is not bound by it or subject to its application. However, given that Regulation (EU) 2024/1717 builds upon the Schengenacquis, Denmark, in accordance with Article 4 of that Protocol, notified on 19 November 2024 its decision to implement Regulation (EU) 2024/1717 in its national law. Denmark is therefore bound under international law to implement this Decision.
(6) This Decision does not constitute a development of the provisions of the Schengenacquis, in which Ireland takes part in accordance with Council Decision 2002/192/EC(3). Ireland is therefore not taking part in the adoption of this Decision and is not bound by it or subject to its application.
(7) As regards Cyprus, this Decision constitutes an act building upon, or otherwise related to, the Schengenacquiswithin the meaning of Article 3(2) of the 2003 Act of Accession.
(8) As regards Iceland and Norway, this Decision constitutes a development of the provisions of the Schengenacquiswithin the meaning of the Agreement concluded by the Council of the European Union and the Republic of Iceland and the Kingdom of Norway concerning the latters’ association with the implementation, application and development of the Schengenacquis(4), which fall within the area referred to in Article 1, point A, of Council Decision 1999/437/EC(5).
(9) As regards Switzerland, this Decision constitutes a development of the provisions of the Schengenacquiswithin the meaning of the Agreement between the European Union, the European Community and the Swiss Confederation on the Swiss Confederation’s association with the implementation, application and development of the Schengenacquis(6)which fall within the area referred to in Article 1, point A, of Decision 1999/437/EC read in conjunction with Article 3 of Council Decision 2008/146/EC(7).
(10) As regards Liechtenstein, this Decision constitutes a development of the provisions of the Schengenacquiswithin the meaning of the Protocol between the European Union, the European Community, the Swiss Confederation and the Principality of Liechtenstein on the accession of the Principality of Liechtenstein to the Agreement between the European Union, the European Community and the Swiss Confederation on the Swiss Confederation’s association with the implementation, application and development of the Schengenacquis(8)which fall within the area referred to in Article 1, point A, of Decision 1999/437/EC read in conjunction with Article 3 of Council Decision 2011/350/EU(9).
(11) The measures provided for in this Decision are in accordance with the opinion of the Schengen Borders Code Committee,
Please specify Member State(s).
Please specify the date of submission of the notification.
Please specify date and duration. In the absence of a time indication the reintroduction or prolongation is presumed to enter into effect at midnight (00:00) on the first date of the reintroduction or prolongation of border control at internal borders.
Please specify the part or parts of the internal borders, as well as the type of border (land, sea, air) at which border control will be reintroduced or prolonged.
☐ first reintroduction of border control at internal borders (unforeseeable event): Article 25a(1) of Regulation (EU) 2016/399
☐ prolongation of border control at internal borders (unforeseeable event): Article 25a(3) of Regulation (EU) 2016/399Period(s) of previous reintroduction(s) of border control at internal borders:Please indicate the dates of previous reintroductions of border control at internal borders. Please indicate the dates of previous reintroductions of border control at internal borders.
Please indicate the dates of previous reintroductions of border control at internal borders.
Please indicate the dates of previous reintroductions of border control at internal borders.
☐ first reintroduction of border control at internal borders (foreseeable event): Article 25a(4) and (5) of Regulation (EU) 2016/399
☐ prolongation of border control at internal borders (foreseeable event): Article 25a(4) and (5) of Regulation (EU) 2016/399Period(s) of previous reintroduction(s) of border control at internal borders:Please indicate the dates of previous reintroductions of border control at internal borders. Please indicate the dates of previous reintroductions of border control at internal borders.
Please indicate the dates of previous reintroductions of border control at internal borders.
Please indicate the dates of previous reintroductions of border control at internal borders.
☐ prolongation of border control at internal borders after 2 years, for major exceptional situation: Article 25a(6) of Regulation (EU) 2016/399Period(s) of previous reintroduction(s) of border control at internal borders:Please indicate the dates of previous reintroductions of border control at internal borders. Please indicate the dates of previous reintroductions of border control at internal borders.
Please indicate the dates of previous reintroductions of border control at internal borders.
Please indicate the dates of previous reintroductions of border control at internal borders.
☐ prolongation of border control at internal borders after 2 years and 6 months, for major exceptional situation: Article 25a(6) of Regulation (EU) 2016/399Period(s) of previous reintroduction(s) of border control at internal borders:Please indicate the dates of previous reintroductions of border control at internal borders. Please indicate the dates of previous reintroductions of border control at internal borders.
Please indicate the dates of previous reintroductions of border control at internal borders.
Please indicate the dates of previous reintroductions of border control at internal borders.
☐ reintroduction of border control at internal borders in accordance with a Council Implementing Decision: Article 28(1) and (5) of Regulation (EU) 2016/399
NB: A continuation of a reintroduction of border control at the internal borders does not have to be considered a prolongation if the serious threat to public policy or internal security upon which it is based is different from the serious threat that motivated the preceding reintroduction of border control at the internal border. If this is the case, please notify for a first reintroduction and specify the new and distinct nature of the serious threat to public policy or internal security under 7.
Please indicate when the circumstances giving rise to the need to reintroduce or prolong border control at internal borders became known.
☐ terrorist incidents or threats, and threats posed by serious organised crimePlease specify and include all relevant data detailing the events that constitute a serious threat. Please specify and include all relevant data detailing the events that constitute a serious threat.
Please specify and include all relevant data detailing the events that constitute a serious threat.
Please specify and include all relevant data detailing the events that constitute a serious threat.
☐ large-scale public health emergenciesPlease specify and include all relevant data detailing the events that constitute a serious threat. Please specify and include all relevant data detailing the events that constitute a serious threat.
Please specify and include all relevant data detailing the events that constitute a serious threat.
Please specify and include all relevant data detailing the events that constitute a serious threat.
☐ an exceptional situation characterised by sudden large-scale unauthorised movements of third country nationals, within the meaning of Article 25(1), point (c), of Regulation (EU) 2016/399Please specify and include all relevant data detailing the events that constitute a serious threat.Please include information as to the sudden nature of the large-scale unauthorised movement, the strain put on the resources and capacities of the competent authorities, the level of preparedness of the competent authorities, the likely risk to the overall functioning of the area without internal border control, and the available evidence from information analysis and all available data, including from relevant Union agencies. Please specify and include all relevant data detailing the events that constitute a serious threat.Please include information as to the sudden nature of the large-scale unauthorised movement, the strain put on the resources and capacities of the competent authorities, the level of preparedness of the competent authorities, the likely risk to the overall functioning of the area without internal border control, and the available evidence from information analysis and all available data, including from relevant Union agencies.
Please specify and include all relevant data detailing the events that constitute a serious threat.Please include information as to the sudden nature of the large-scale unauthorised movement, the strain put on the resources and capacities of the competent authorities, the level of preparedness of the competent authorities, the likely risk to the overall functioning of the area without internal border control, and the available evidence from information analysis and all available data, including from relevant Union agencies.
Please specify and include all relevant data detailing the events that constitute a serious threat.Please include information as to the sudden nature of the large-scale unauthorised movement, the strain put on the resources and capacities of the competent authorities, the level of preparedness of the competent authorities, the likely risk to the overall functioning of the area without internal border control, and the available evidence from information analysis and all available data, including from relevant Union agencies.
☐ Large scale or high-profile international eventPlease specify and include all relevant data detailing the events that constitute a serious threat. Please specify and include all relevant data detailing the events that constitute a serious threat.
Please specify and include all relevant data detailing the events that constitute a serious threat.
Please specify and include all relevant data detailing the events that constitute a serious threat.
☐ OtherPlease specify and include all relevant data detailing the events that constitute a serious threat. Please specify and include all relevant data detailing the events that constitute a serious threat.
Please specify and include all relevant data detailing the events that constitute a serious threat.
Please specify and include all relevant data detailing the events that constitute a serious threat.
Please fill in or attach a separate file to the notification. If no list is provided, please explain.
Please specify the measures adopted by other Member States in response to the reintroduction of border control at internal borders.
10.1.Appropriateness: explanation how the reintroduction of border control at internal borders is likely to adequately remedy the threat10.2.Explanation why the objectives pursued by the reintroduction cannot be obtained by:—the use of alternative measures, such as proportionate checks carried out in the context of checks within the territory as referred to in Article 23, point (a), of Regulation (EU) 2016/399;—the use of the procedure laid down in Article 23a of Regulation (EU) 2016/399;—other forms of police cooperation provided for under Union law;—common measures regarding temporary restrictions on travel to the Member States as referred to in Article 21a(2) of Regulation (EU) 2016/399.10.3.Likely impact on the movement of persons within the area without internal border control and the functioning of cross-border regionsPlease include an overview of mitigating measures envisaged to limit the impact on the free movement of persons and the functioning of cross-border regions, in particular in relation to frontier workers and economic operators, waiting times and traffic congestion.Please indicate which cross-border regions, as notified under Article 42b of Regulation (EU) 2016/399, are affected by the reintroduction of control at the internal border.10.4.If the serious threat consists of sudden large-scale unauthorised movements (Article 25(1), point (c), and 27(3) of Regulation (EU) 2016/399):Please provide a risk assessment and information on the sudden large-scale unauthorised movements, including any information obtained from Union Agencies and data analysis from relevant information systems.Please include quantitative and qualitative data, including for example the number of applications for international protection and unauthorised movements, as well as information on to the sudden nature of the large-scale unauthorised movement, the strain put on the resources and capacities of the competent authorities, the level of preparedness of the competent authorities, the likely risk to the overall functioning of the area without internal border control.10.5.Opinion of the Commission and consultation process (if applicable)Please specify:—what action has been taken in response to opinion(s) of the Commission issued in accordance with Article 27a(2) or 27a(3) of Regulation (EU) 2016/399;—what action has been taken in response to the outcome of a consultation process established in accordance with Article 27a(4) of Regulation (EU) 2016/399. 10.1. Appropriateness: explanation how the reintroduction of border control at internal borders is likely to adequately remedy the threat 10.2. Explanation why the objectives pursued by the reintroduction cannot be obtained by:—the use of alternative measures, such as proportionate checks carried out in the context of checks within the territory as referred to in Article 23, point (a), of Regulation (EU) 2016/399;—the use of the procedure laid down in Article 23a of Regulation (EU) 2016/399;—other forms of police cooperation provided for under Union law;—common measures regarding temporary restrictions on travel to the Member States as referred to in Article 21a(2) of Regulation (EU) 2016/399. —the use of alternative measures, such as proportionate checks carried out in the context of checks within the territory as referred to in Article 23, point (a), of Regulation (EU) 2016/399;—the use of the procedure laid down in Article 23a of Regulation (EU) 2016/399;—other forms of police cooperation provided for under Union law;—common measures regarding temporary restrictions on travel to the Member States as referred to in Article 21a(2) of Regulation (EU) 2016/399. — the use of alternative measures, such as proportionate checks carried out in the context of checks within the territory as referred to in Article 23, point (a), of Regulation (EU) 2016/399; — the use of the procedure laid down in Article 23a of Regulation (EU) 2016/399; — other forms of police cooperation provided for under Union law; — common measures regarding temporary restrictions on travel to the Member States as referred to in Article 21a(2) of Regulation (EU) 2016/399. 10.3. Likely impact on the movement of persons within the area without internal border control and the functioning of cross-border regionsPlease include an overview of mitigating measures envisaged to limit the impact on the free movement of persons and the functioning of cross-border regions, in particular in relation to frontier workers and economic operators, waiting times and traffic congestion.Please indicate which cross-border regions, as notified under Article 42b of Regulation (EU) 2016/399, are affected by the reintroduction of control at the internal border. Please include an overview of mitigating measures envisaged to limit the impact on the free movement of persons and the functioning of cross-border regions, in particular in relation to frontier workers and economic operators, waiting times and traffic congestion.Please indicate which cross-border regions, as notified under Article 42b of Regulation (EU) 2016/399, are affected by the reintroduction of control at the internal border. 10.4. If the serious threat consists of sudden large-scale unauthorised movements (Article 25(1), point (c), and 27(3) of Regulation (EU) 2016/399):Please provide a risk assessment and information on the sudden large-scale unauthorised movements, including any information obtained from Union Agencies and data analysis from relevant information systems.Please include quantitative and qualitative data, including for example the number of applications for international protection and unauthorised movements, as well as information on to the sudden nature of the large-scale unauthorised movement, the strain put on the resources and capacities of the competent authorities, the level of preparedness of the competent authorities, the likely risk to the overall functioning of the area without internal border control. Please provide a risk assessment and information on the sudden large-scale unauthorised movements, including any information obtained from Union Agencies and data analysis from relevant information systems.Please include quantitative and qualitative data, including for example the number of applications for international protection and unauthorised movements, as well as information on to the sudden nature of the large-scale unauthorised movement, the strain put on the resources and capacities of the competent authorities, the level of preparedness of the competent authorities, the likely risk to the overall functioning of the area without internal border control. 10.5. Opinion of the Commission and consultation process (if applicable)Please specify:—what action has been taken in response to opinion(s) of the Commission issued in accordance with Article 27a(2) or 27a(3) of Regulation (EU) 2016/399;—what action has been taken in response to the outcome of a consultation process established in accordance with Article 27a(4) of Regulation (EU) 2016/399. Please specify:—what action has been taken in response to opinion(s) of the Commission issued in accordance with Article 27a(2) or 27a(3) of Regulation (EU) 2016/399;—what action has been taken in response to the outcome of a consultation process established in accordance with Article 27a(4) of Regulation (EU) 2016/399. — what action has been taken in response to opinion(s) of the Commission issued in accordance with Article 27a(2) or 27a(3) of Regulation (EU) 2016/399; — what action has been taken in response to the outcome of a consultation process established in accordance with Article 27a(4) of Regulation (EU) 2016/399.
10.1. Appropriateness: explanation how the reintroduction of border control at internal borders is likely to adequately remedy the threat
10.2. Explanation why the objectives pursued by the reintroduction cannot be obtained by:—the use of alternative measures, such as proportionate checks carried out in the context of checks within the territory as referred to in Article 23, point (a), of Regulation (EU) 2016/399;—the use of the procedure laid down in Article 23a of Regulation (EU) 2016/399;—other forms of police cooperation provided for under Union law;—common measures regarding temporary restrictions on travel to the Member States as referred to in Article 21a(2) of Regulation (EU) 2016/399. —the use of alternative measures, such as proportionate checks carried out in the context of checks within the territory as referred to in Article 23, point (a), of Regulation (EU) 2016/399;—the use of the procedure laid down in Article 23a of Regulation (EU) 2016/399;—other forms of police cooperation provided for under Union law;—common measures regarding temporary restrictions on travel to the Member States as referred to in Article 21a(2) of Regulation (EU) 2016/399. — the use of alternative measures, such as proportionate checks carried out in the context of checks within the territory as referred to in Article 23, point (a), of Regulation (EU) 2016/399; — the use of the procedure laid down in Article 23a of Regulation (EU) 2016/399; — other forms of police cooperation provided for under Union law; — common measures regarding temporary restrictions on travel to the Member States as referred to in Article 21a(2) of Regulation (EU) 2016/399.
—the use of alternative measures, such as proportionate checks carried out in the context of checks within the territory as referred to in Article 23, point (a), of Regulation (EU) 2016/399;—the use of the procedure laid down in Article 23a of Regulation (EU) 2016/399;—other forms of police cooperation provided for under Union law;—common measures regarding temporary restrictions on travel to the Member States as referred to in Article 21a(2) of Regulation (EU) 2016/399. — the use of alternative measures, such as proportionate checks carried out in the context of checks within the territory as referred to in Article 23, point (a), of Regulation (EU) 2016/399; — the use of the procedure laid down in Article 23a of Regulation (EU) 2016/399; — other forms of police cooperation provided for under Union law; — common measures regarding temporary restrictions on travel to the Member States as referred to in Article 21a(2) of Regulation (EU) 2016/399.
— the use of alternative measures, such as proportionate checks carried out in the context of checks within the territory as referred to in Article 23, point (a), of Regulation (EU) 2016/399;
— the use of the procedure laid down in Article 23a of Regulation (EU) 2016/399;
— other forms of police cooperation provided for under Union law;
— common measures regarding temporary restrictions on travel to the Member States as referred to in Article 21a(2) of Regulation (EU) 2016/399.
10.3. Likely impact on the movement of persons within the area without internal border control and the functioning of cross-border regionsPlease include an overview of mitigating measures envisaged to limit the impact on the free movement of persons and the functioning of cross-border regions, in particular in relation to frontier workers and economic operators, waiting times and traffic congestion.Please indicate which cross-border regions, as notified under Article 42b of Regulation (EU) 2016/399, are affected by the reintroduction of control at the internal border. Please include an overview of mitigating measures envisaged to limit the impact on the free movement of persons and the functioning of cross-border regions, in particular in relation to frontier workers and economic operators, waiting times and traffic congestion.Please indicate which cross-border regions, as notified under Article 42b of Regulation (EU) 2016/399, are affected by the reintroduction of control at the internal border.
Please include an overview of mitigating measures envisaged to limit the impact on the free movement of persons and the functioning of cross-border regions, in particular in relation to frontier workers and economic operators, waiting times and traffic congestion.Please indicate which cross-border regions, as notified under Article 42b of Regulation (EU) 2016/399, are affected by the reintroduction of control at the internal border.
10.4. If the serious threat consists of sudden large-scale unauthorised movements (Article 25(1), point (c), and 27(3) of Regulation (EU) 2016/399):Please provide a risk assessment and information on the sudden large-scale unauthorised movements, including any information obtained from Union Agencies and data analysis from relevant information systems.Please include quantitative and qualitative data, including for example the number of applications for international protection and unauthorised movements, as well as information on to the sudden nature of the large-scale unauthorised movement, the strain put on the resources and capacities of the competent authorities, the level of preparedness of the competent authorities, the likely risk to the overall functioning of the area without internal border control. Please provide a risk assessment and information on the sudden large-scale unauthorised movements, including any information obtained from Union Agencies and data analysis from relevant information systems.Please include quantitative and qualitative data, including for example the number of applications for international protection and unauthorised movements, as well as information on to the sudden nature of the large-scale unauthorised movement, the strain put on the resources and capacities of the competent authorities, the level of preparedness of the competent authorities, the likely risk to the overall functioning of the area without internal border control.
Please provide a risk assessment and information on the sudden large-scale unauthorised movements, including any information obtained from Union Agencies and data analysis from relevant information systems.Please include quantitative and qualitative data, including for example the number of applications for international protection and unauthorised movements, as well as information on to the sudden nature of the large-scale unauthorised movement, the strain put on the resources and capacities of the competent authorities, the level of preparedness of the competent authorities, the likely risk to the overall functioning of the area without internal border control.
10.5. Opinion of the Commission and consultation process (if applicable)Please specify:—what action has been taken in response to opinion(s) of the Commission issued in accordance with Article 27a(2) or 27a(3) of Regulation (EU) 2016/399;—what action has been taken in response to the outcome of a consultation process established in accordance with Article 27a(4) of Regulation (EU) 2016/399. Please specify:—what action has been taken in response to opinion(s) of the Commission issued in accordance with Article 27a(2) or 27a(3) of Regulation (EU) 2016/399;—what action has been taken in response to the outcome of a consultation process established in accordance with Article 27a(4) of Regulation (EU) 2016/399. — what action has been taken in response to opinion(s) of the Commission issued in accordance with Article 27a(2) or 27a(3) of Regulation (EU) 2016/399; — what action has been taken in response to the outcome of a consultation process established in accordance with Article 27a(4) of Regulation (EU) 2016/399.
Please specify:—what action has been taken in response to opinion(s) of the Commission issued in accordance with Article 27a(2) or 27a(3) of Regulation (EU) 2016/399;—what action has been taken in response to the outcome of a consultation process established in accordance with Article 27a(4) of Regulation (EU) 2016/399. — what action has been taken in response to opinion(s) of the Commission issued in accordance with Article 27a(2) or 27a(3) of Regulation (EU) 2016/399; — what action has been taken in response to the outcome of a consultation process established in accordance with Article 27a(4) of Regulation (EU) 2016/399.
— what action has been taken in response to opinion(s) of the Commission issued in accordance with Article 27a(2) or 27a(3) of Regulation (EU) 2016/399;
— what action has been taken in response to the outcome of a consultation process established in accordance with Article 27a(4) of Regulation (EU) 2016/399.
10.1. Appropriateness: explanation how the reintroduction of border control at internal borders is likely to adequately remedy the threat
10.2. Explanation why the objectives pursued by the reintroduction cannot be obtained by:—the use of alternative measures, such as proportionate checks carried out in the context of checks within the territory as referred to in Article 23, point (a), of Regulation (EU) 2016/399;—the use of the procedure laid down in Article 23a of Regulation (EU) 2016/399;—other forms of police cooperation provided for under Union law;—common measures regarding temporary restrictions on travel to the Member States as referred to in Article 21a(2) of Regulation (EU) 2016/399. —the use of alternative measures, such as proportionate checks carried out in the context of checks within the territory as referred to in Article 23, point (a), of Regulation (EU) 2016/399;—the use of the procedure laid down in Article 23a of Regulation (EU) 2016/399;—other forms of police cooperation provided for under Union law;—common measures regarding temporary restrictions on travel to the Member States as referred to in Article 21a(2) of Regulation (EU) 2016/399. — the use of alternative measures, such as proportionate checks carried out in the context of checks within the territory as referred to in Article 23, point (a), of Regulation (EU) 2016/399; — the use of the procedure laid down in Article 23a of Regulation (EU) 2016/399; — other forms of police cooperation provided for under Union law; — common measures regarding temporary restrictions on travel to the Member States as referred to in Article 21a(2) of Regulation (EU) 2016/399.
—the use of alternative measures, such as proportionate checks carried out in the context of checks within the territory as referred to in Article 23, point (a), of Regulation (EU) 2016/399;—the use of the procedure laid down in Article 23a of Regulation (EU) 2016/399;—other forms of police cooperation provided for under Union law;—common measures regarding temporary restrictions on travel to the Member States as referred to in Article 21a(2) of Regulation (EU) 2016/399. — the use of alternative measures, such as proportionate checks carried out in the context of checks within the territory as referred to in Article 23, point (a), of Regulation (EU) 2016/399; — the use of the procedure laid down in Article 23a of Regulation (EU) 2016/399; — other forms of police cooperation provided for under Union law; — common measures regarding temporary restrictions on travel to the Member States as referred to in Article 21a(2) of Regulation (EU) 2016/399.
— the use of alternative measures, such as proportionate checks carried out in the context of checks within the territory as referred to in Article 23, point (a), of Regulation (EU) 2016/399;
— the use of the procedure laid down in Article 23a of Regulation (EU) 2016/399;
— other forms of police cooperation provided for under Union law;
— common measures regarding temporary restrictions on travel to the Member States as referred to in Article 21a(2) of Regulation (EU) 2016/399.
—the use of alternative measures, such as proportionate checks carried out in the context of checks within the territory as referred to in Article 23, point (a), of Regulation (EU) 2016/399;—the use of the procedure laid down in Article 23a of Regulation (EU) 2016/399;—other forms of police cooperation provided for under Union law;—common measures regarding temporary restrictions on travel to the Member States as referred to in Article 21a(2) of Regulation (EU) 2016/399. — the use of alternative measures, such as proportionate checks carried out in the context of checks within the territory as referred to in Article 23, point (a), of Regulation (EU) 2016/399; — the use of the procedure laid down in Article 23a of Regulation (EU) 2016/399; — other forms of police cooperation provided for under Union law; — common measures regarding temporary restrictions on travel to the Member States as referred to in Article 21a(2) of Regulation (EU) 2016/399.
— the use of alternative measures, such as proportionate checks carried out in the context of checks within the territory as referred to in Article 23, point (a), of Regulation (EU) 2016/399;
— the use of the procedure laid down in Article 23a of Regulation (EU) 2016/399;
— other forms of police cooperation provided for under Union law;
— common measures regarding temporary restrictions on travel to the Member States as referred to in Article 21a(2) of Regulation (EU) 2016/399.
— the use of alternative measures, such as proportionate checks carried out in the context of checks within the territory as referred to in Article 23, point (a), of Regulation (EU) 2016/399;
— the use of the procedure laid down in Article 23a of Regulation (EU) 2016/399;
— other forms of police cooperation provided for under Union law;
— common measures regarding temporary restrictions on travel to the Member States as referred to in Article 21a(2) of Regulation (EU) 2016/399.
10.3. Likely impact on the movement of persons within the area without internal border control and the functioning of cross-border regionsPlease include an overview of mitigating measures envisaged to limit the impact on the free movement of persons and the functioning of cross-border regions, in particular in relation to frontier workers and economic operators, waiting times and traffic congestion.Please indicate which cross-border regions, as notified under Article 42b of Regulation (EU) 2016/399, are affected by the reintroduction of control at the internal border. Please include an overview of mitigating measures envisaged to limit the impact on the free movement of persons and the functioning of cross-border regions, in particular in relation to frontier workers and economic operators, waiting times and traffic congestion.Please indicate which cross-border regions, as notified under Article 42b of Regulation (EU) 2016/399, are affected by the reintroduction of control at the internal border.
Please include an overview of mitigating measures envisaged to limit the impact on the free movement of persons and the functioning of cross-border regions, in particular in relation to frontier workers and economic operators, waiting times and traffic congestion.Please indicate which cross-border regions, as notified under Article 42b of Regulation (EU) 2016/399, are affected by the reintroduction of control at the internal border.
Please include an overview of mitigating measures envisaged to limit the impact on the free movement of persons and the functioning of cross-border regions, in particular in relation to frontier workers and economic operators, waiting times and traffic congestion.Please indicate which cross-border regions, as notified under Article 42b of Regulation (EU) 2016/399, are affected by the reintroduction of control at the internal border.
10.4. If the serious threat consists of sudden large-scale unauthorised movements (Article 25(1), point (c), and 27(3) of Regulation (EU) 2016/399):Please provide a risk assessment and information on the sudden large-scale unauthorised movements, including any information obtained from Union Agencies and data analysis from relevant information systems.Please include quantitative and qualitative data, including for example the number of applications for international protection and unauthorised movements, as well as information on to the sudden nature of the large-scale unauthorised movement, the strain put on the resources and capacities of the competent authorities, the level of preparedness of the competent authorities, the likely risk to the overall functioning of the area without internal border control. Please provide a risk assessment and information on the sudden large-scale unauthorised movements, including any information obtained from Union Agencies and data analysis from relevant information systems.Please include quantitative and qualitative data, including for example the number of applications for international protection and unauthorised movements, as well as information on to the sudden nature of the large-scale unauthorised movement, the strain put on the resources and capacities of the competent authorities, the level of preparedness of the competent authorities, the likely risk to the overall functioning of the area without internal border control.
Please provide a risk assessment and information on the sudden large-scale unauthorised movements, including any information obtained from Union Agencies and data analysis from relevant information systems.Please include quantitative and qualitative data, including for example the number of applications for international protection and unauthorised movements, as well as information on to the sudden nature of the large-scale unauthorised movement, the strain put on the resources and capacities of the competent authorities, the level of preparedness of the competent authorities, the likely risk to the overall functioning of the area without internal border control.
Please provide a risk assessment and information on the sudden large-scale unauthorised movements, including any information obtained from Union Agencies and data analysis from relevant information systems.Please include quantitative and qualitative data, including for example the number of applications for international protection and unauthorised movements, as well as information on to the sudden nature of the large-scale unauthorised movement, the strain put on the resources and capacities of the competent authorities, the level of preparedness of the competent authorities, the likely risk to the overall functioning of the area without internal border control.
10.5. Opinion of the Commission and consultation process (if applicable)Please specify:—what action has been taken in response to opinion(s) of the Commission issued in accordance with Article 27a(2) or 27a(3) of Regulation (EU) 2016/399;—what action has been taken in response to the outcome of a consultation process established in accordance with Article 27a(4) of Regulation (EU) 2016/399. Please specify:—what action has been taken in response to opinion(s) of the Commission issued in accordance with Article 27a(2) or 27a(3) of Regulation (EU) 2016/399;—what action has been taken in response to the outcome of a consultation process established in accordance with Article 27a(4) of Regulation (EU) 2016/399. — what action has been taken in response to opinion(s) of the Commission issued in accordance with Article 27a(2) or 27a(3) of Regulation (EU) 2016/399; — what action has been taken in response to the outcome of a consultation process established in accordance with Article 27a(4) of Regulation (EU) 2016/399.
Please specify:—what action has been taken in response to opinion(s) of the Commission issued in accordance with Article 27a(2) or 27a(3) of Regulation (EU) 2016/399;—what action has been taken in response to the outcome of a consultation process established in accordance with Article 27a(4) of Regulation (EU) 2016/399. — what action has been taken in response to opinion(s) of the Commission issued in accordance with Article 27a(2) or 27a(3) of Regulation (EU) 2016/399; — what action has been taken in response to the outcome of a consultation process established in accordance with Article 27a(4) of Regulation (EU) 2016/399.
— what action has been taken in response to opinion(s) of the Commission issued in accordance with Article 27a(2) or 27a(3) of Regulation (EU) 2016/399;
— what action has been taken in response to the outcome of a consultation process established in accordance with Article 27a(4) of Regulation (EU) 2016/399.
Please specify:—what action has been taken in response to opinion(s) of the Commission issued in accordance with Article 27a(2) or 27a(3) of Regulation (EU) 2016/399;—what action has been taken in response to the outcome of a consultation process established in accordance with Article 27a(4) of Regulation (EU) 2016/399. — what action has been taken in response to opinion(s) of the Commission issued in accordance with Article 27a(2) or 27a(3) of Regulation (EU) 2016/399; — what action has been taken in response to the outcome of a consultation process established in accordance with Article 27a(4) of Regulation (EU) 2016/399.
— what action has been taken in response to opinion(s) of the Commission issued in accordance with Article 27a(2) or 27a(3) of Regulation (EU) 2016/399;
— what action has been taken in response to the outcome of a consultation process established in accordance with Article 27a(4) of Regulation (EU) 2016/399.
— what action has been taken in response to opinion(s) of the Commission issued in accordance with Article 27a(2) or 27a(3) of Regulation (EU) 2016/399;
— what action has been taken in response to the outcome of a consultation process established in accordance with Article 27a(4) of Regulation (EU) 2016/399.
11.1.Assessment of the necessity and proportionality based on the criteria laid down in Article 26(1) of Regulation (EU) 2016/399Please fill in point 10, taking into account the previous assessment of necessity and proportionality and the evolution of the serious threat since the reintroduction of border control at internal borders.11.2.Scale and anticipated evolution of the serious threatPlease elaborate on the scale and anticipated evolution of the serious threat, in particular:—how long the serious threat is expected to persist;—which sections of the internal borders may be affected;—information regarding coordination measures with other Member States impacted or likely to be impacted by the border control at internal borders. 11.1. Assessment of the necessity and proportionality based on the criteria laid down in Article 26(1) of Regulation (EU) 2016/399Please fill in point 10, taking into account the previous assessment of necessity and proportionality and the evolution of the serious threat since the reintroduction of border control at internal borders. Please fill in point 10, taking into account the previous assessment of necessity and proportionality and the evolution of the serious threat since the reintroduction of border control at internal borders. 11.2. Scale and anticipated evolution of the serious threatPlease elaborate on the scale and anticipated evolution of the serious threat, in particular:—how long the serious threat is expected to persist;—which sections of the internal borders may be affected;—information regarding coordination measures with other Member States impacted or likely to be impacted by the border control at internal borders. Please elaborate on the scale and anticipated evolution of the serious threat, in particular:—how long the serious threat is expected to persist;—which sections of the internal borders may be affected;—information regarding coordination measures with other Member States impacted or likely to be impacted by the border control at internal borders. — how long the serious threat is expected to persist; — which sections of the internal borders may be affected; — information regarding coordination measures with other Member States impacted or likely to be impacted by the border control at internal borders.
11.1. Assessment of the necessity and proportionality based on the criteria laid down in Article 26(1) of Regulation (EU) 2016/399Please fill in point 10, taking into account the previous assessment of necessity and proportionality and the evolution of the serious threat since the reintroduction of border control at internal borders. Please fill in point 10, taking into account the previous assessment of necessity and proportionality and the evolution of the serious threat since the reintroduction of border control at internal borders.
Please fill in point 10, taking into account the previous assessment of necessity and proportionality and the evolution of the serious threat since the reintroduction of border control at internal borders.
11.2. Scale and anticipated evolution of the serious threatPlease elaborate on the scale and anticipated evolution of the serious threat, in particular:—how long the serious threat is expected to persist;—which sections of the internal borders may be affected;—information regarding coordination measures with other Member States impacted or likely to be impacted by the border control at internal borders. Please elaborate on the scale and anticipated evolution of the serious threat, in particular:—how long the serious threat is expected to persist;—which sections of the internal borders may be affected;—information regarding coordination measures with other Member States impacted or likely to be impacted by the border control at internal borders. — how long the serious threat is expected to persist; — which sections of the internal borders may be affected; — information regarding coordination measures with other Member States impacted or likely to be impacted by the border control at internal borders.
Please elaborate on the scale and anticipated evolution of the serious threat, in particular:—how long the serious threat is expected to persist;—which sections of the internal borders may be affected;—information regarding coordination measures with other Member States impacted or likely to be impacted by the border control at internal borders. — how long the serious threat is expected to persist; — which sections of the internal borders may be affected; — information regarding coordination measures with other Member States impacted or likely to be impacted by the border control at internal borders.
— how long the serious threat is expected to persist;
— which sections of the internal borders may be affected;
— information regarding coordination measures with other Member States impacted or likely to be impacted by the border control at internal borders.
11.1. Assessment of the necessity and proportionality based on the criteria laid down in Article 26(1) of Regulation (EU) 2016/399Please fill in point 10, taking into account the previous assessment of necessity and proportionality and the evolution of the serious threat since the reintroduction of border control at internal borders. Please fill in point 10, taking into account the previous assessment of necessity and proportionality and the evolution of the serious threat since the reintroduction of border control at internal borders.
Please fill in point 10, taking into account the previous assessment of necessity and proportionality and the evolution of the serious threat since the reintroduction of border control at internal borders.
Please fill in point 10, taking into account the previous assessment of necessity and proportionality and the evolution of the serious threat since the reintroduction of border control at internal borders.
11.2. Scale and anticipated evolution of the serious threatPlease elaborate on the scale and anticipated evolution of the serious threat, in particular:—how long the serious threat is expected to persist;—which sections of the internal borders may be affected;—information regarding coordination measures with other Member States impacted or likely to be impacted by the border control at internal borders. Please elaborate on the scale and anticipated evolution of the serious threat, in particular:—how long the serious threat is expected to persist;—which sections of the internal borders may be affected;—information regarding coordination measures with other Member States impacted or likely to be impacted by the border control at internal borders. — how long the serious threat is expected to persist; — which sections of the internal borders may be affected; — information regarding coordination measures with other Member States impacted or likely to be impacted by the border control at internal borders.
Please elaborate on the scale and anticipated evolution of the serious threat, in particular:—how long the serious threat is expected to persist;—which sections of the internal borders may be affected;—information regarding coordination measures with other Member States impacted or likely to be impacted by the border control at internal borders. — how long the serious threat is expected to persist; — which sections of the internal borders may be affected; — information regarding coordination measures with other Member States impacted or likely to be impacted by the border control at internal borders.
— how long the serious threat is expected to persist;
— which sections of the internal borders may be affected;
— information regarding coordination measures with other Member States impacted or likely to be impacted by the border control at internal borders.
Please elaborate on the scale and anticipated evolution of the serious threat, in particular:—how long the serious threat is expected to persist;—which sections of the internal borders may be affected;—information regarding coordination measures with other Member States impacted or likely to be impacted by the border control at internal borders. — how long the serious threat is expected to persist; — which sections of the internal borders may be affected; — information regarding coordination measures with other Member States impacted or likely to be impacted by the border control at internal borders.
— how long the serious threat is expected to persist;
— which sections of the internal borders may be affected;
— information regarding coordination measures with other Member States impacted or likely to be impacted by the border control at internal borders.
— how long the serious threat is expected to persist;
— which sections of the internal borders may be affected;
— information regarding coordination measures with other Member States impacted or likely to be impacted by the border control at internal borders.
12.1.Assessment of the necessity and proportionality based on the criteria laid down in Article 26(2) of Regulation (EU) 2016/399Please fill in point 11.12.2.Action taken in response to an opinion of the Commission issued in accordance with Article 25a(6) of Regulation (EU) 2016/399 (if applicable)12.3.Action taken in response to a consultation process initiated in accordance with Article 25a(6) of Regulation (EU) 2016/399 (if applicable)12.4.Substantiation of the continued threat to public policy or internal security12.5.Explanation why alternative measures are ineffective12.6.Presentation of mitigating measures12.7.Where appropriate: presentation of the means, actions, conditions and timeline with a view to lifting border control at internal borders 12.1. Assessment of the necessity and proportionality based on the criteria laid down in Article 26(2) of Regulation (EU) 2016/399Please fill in point 11. Please fill in point 11. 12.2. Action taken in response to an opinion of the Commission issued in accordance with Article 25a(6) of Regulation (EU) 2016/399 (if applicable) 12.3. Action taken in response to a consultation process initiated in accordance with Article 25a(6) of Regulation (EU) 2016/399 (if applicable) 12.4. Substantiation of the continued threat to public policy or internal security 12.5. Explanation why alternative measures are ineffective 12.6. Presentation of mitigating measures 12.7. Where appropriate: presentation of the means, actions, conditions and timeline with a view to lifting border control at internal borders
12.1. Assessment of the necessity and proportionality based on the criteria laid down in Article 26(2) of Regulation (EU) 2016/399Please fill in point 11. Please fill in point 11.
Please fill in point 11.
12.2. Action taken in response to an opinion of the Commission issued in accordance with Article 25a(6) of Regulation (EU) 2016/399 (if applicable)
12.3. Action taken in response to a consultation process initiated in accordance with Article 25a(6) of Regulation (EU) 2016/399 (if applicable)
12.4. Substantiation of the continued threat to public policy or internal security
12.5. Explanation why alternative measures are ineffective
12.6. Presentation of mitigating measures
12.7. Where appropriate: presentation of the means, actions, conditions and timeline with a view to lifting border control at internal borders
12.1. Assessment of the necessity and proportionality based on the criteria laid down in Article 26(2) of Regulation (EU) 2016/399Please fill in point 11. Please fill in point 11.
Please fill in point 11.
Please fill in point 11.
12.2. Action taken in response to an opinion of the Commission issued in accordance with Article 25a(6) of Regulation (EU) 2016/399 (if applicable)
12.3. Action taken in response to a consultation process initiated in accordance with Article 25a(6) of Regulation (EU) 2016/399 (if applicable)
12.4. Substantiation of the continued threat to public policy or internal security
12.5. Explanation why alternative measures are ineffective
12.6. Presentation of mitigating measures
12.7. Where appropriate: presentation of the means, actions, conditions and timeline with a view to lifting border control at internal borders
For example:—details of strategic and operational cooperation with other Member States—details on to the use of alternative measures (Article 23 of Regulation (EU) 2016/399)—whether the procedure laid down in Article 23a of Regulation (EU) 2016/399 is applied at the time of reintroduction of border control at internal borders—bilateral or regional cooperation initiatives, including with third countries — details of strategic and operational cooperation with other Member States — details on to the use of alternative measures (Article 23 of Regulation (EU) 2016/399) — whether the procedure laid down in Article 23a of Regulation (EU) 2016/399 is applied at the time of reintroduction of border control at internal borders — bilateral or regional cooperation initiatives, including with third countries
— details of strategic and operational cooperation with other Member States
— details on to the use of alternative measures (Article 23 of Regulation (EU) 2016/399)
— whether the procedure laid down in Article 23a of Regulation (EU) 2016/399 is applied at the time of reintroduction of border control at internal borders
— bilateral or regional cooperation initiatives, including with third countries
— details of strategic and operational cooperation with other Member States
— details on to the use of alternative measures (Article 23 of Regulation (EU) 2016/399)
— whether the procedure laid down in Article 23a of Regulation (EU) 2016/399 is applied at the time of reintroduction of border control at internal borders
— bilateral or regional cooperation initiatives, including with third countries
Please indicate, to the extent that grounds of public security allow, whether any information has been withheld justified on public security grounds, taking into account the confidentiality of ongoing investigations.Please indicate whether any of the notified information, in whole or in part has been classified under national law.
Please indicate and specify if any of the notified information is to remain confidential.
THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,
Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,
Having regard to Regulation (EU) 2016/399 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 9 March 2016 on a Union Code on the rules governing the movement of persons across borders (Schengen Borders Code) (1), and in particular Article 27(6) thereof,
Whereas:
(1) The establishment of an area where persons are free to move without internal borders is one of the main achievements of the Union. Therefore, the reintroduction of border control at internal borders should remain an exception and should only be a measure of last resort.
(2) Regulation (EU) 2016/399 obliges Member States to duly notify any decision to reintroduce such border control to the Commission, the Parliament and the Council.
(3) The Commission is to adopt an implementing act to establish a template for notifications by Member States of the reintroduction or prolongation of border control at internal borders.
(4) The template should include all elements that Member States are required to provide under Regulation (EU) 2016/399 to allow the Commission to assess compliance with the criteria and conditions for a temporary reintroduction of border control at internal borders.
(5) In accordance with Articles 1 and 2 of Protocol No 22 on the position of Denmark, annexed to the Treaty on European Union and to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, Denmark did not take part in the adoption of Regulation (EU) 2024/1717 of the European Parliament and of the Council (2) amending Regulation (EU) 2016/399 and is not bound by it or subject to its application. However, given that Regulation (EU) 2024/1717 builds upon the Schengen acquis, Denmark, in accordance with Article 4 of that Protocol, notified on 19 November 2024 its decision to implement Regulation (EU) 2024/1717 in its national law. Denmark is therefore bound under international law to implement this Decision.
(6) This Decision does not constitute a development of the provisions of the Schengen acquis, in which Ireland takes part in accordance with Council Decision 2002/192/EC (3). Ireland is therefore not taking part in the adoption of this Decision and is not bound by it or subject to its application.
(7) As regards Cyprus, this Decision constitutes an act building upon, or otherwise related to, the Schengen acquis within the meaning of Article 3(2) of the 2003 Act of Accession.
(8) As regards Iceland and Norway, this Decision constitutes a development of the provisions of the Schengen acquis within the meaning of the Agreement concluded by the Council of the European Union and the Republic of Iceland and the Kingdom of Norway concerning the latters’ association with the implementation, application and development of the Schengen acquis (4), which fall within the area referred to in Article 1, point A, of Council Decision 1999/437/EC (5).
(9) As regards Switzerland, this Decision constitutes a development of the provisions of the Schengen acquis within the meaning of the Agreement between the European Union, the European Community and the Swiss Confederation on the Swiss Confederation’s association with the implementation, application and development of the Schengen acquis (6) which fall within the area referred to in Article 1, point A, of Decision 1999/437/EC read in conjunction with Article 3 of Council Decision 2008/146/EC (7).
(10) As regards Liechtenstein, this Decision constitutes a development of the provisions of the Schengen acquis within the meaning of the Protocol between the European Union, the European Community, the Swiss Confederation and the Principality of Liechtenstein on the accession of the Principality of Liechtenstein to the Agreement between the European Union, the European Community and the Swiss Confederation on the Swiss Confederation’s association with the implementation, application and development of the Schengen acquis (8) which fall within the area referred to in Article 1, point A, of Decision 1999/437/EC read in conjunction with Article 3 of Council Decision 2011/350/EU (9).
(11) The measures provided for in this Decision are in accordance with the opinion of the Schengen Borders Code Committee,
HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
The template for the notification of the temporary reintroduction or prolongation of border control at internal borders, as referred to in Article 27 of Regulation (EU) 2016/399, shall be as set out in the Annex to this Decision.
This Decision shall enter into force on the twentieth day following that of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.

1.   Notification submitted by:

Please specify Member State(s).

2. Date of the notification:

Please specify the date of submission of the notification.

3. Date and duration of the planned reintroduction or prolongation of border control at internal borders (Article 27(1), point (d), of Regulation (EU) 2016/399):

Please specify date and duration. In the absence of a time indication the reintroduction or prolongation is presumed to enter into effect at midnight (00:00) on the first date of the reintroduction or prolongation of border control at internal borders.

4. Scope of the proposed reintroduction or prolongation of border control at internal borders, specifying at which part or parts of the internal borders border control will be reintroduced or prolonged (Article 27(1), point (b), of Regulation (EU) 2016/399)

Please specify the part or parts of the internal borders, as well as the type of border (land, sea, air) at which border control will be reintroduced or prolonged.

5. Notification for a:

☐
first reintroduction of border control at internal borders (unforeseeable event): Article 25a(1) of Regulation (EU) 2016/399

☐
prolongation of border control at internal borders (unforeseeable event): Article 25a(3) of Regulation (EU) 2016/399
Period(s) of previous reintroduction(s) of border control at internal borders:
Please indicate the dates of previous reintroductions of border control at internal borders.

☐
first reintroduction of border control at internal borders (foreseeable event): Article 25a(4) and (5) of Regulation (EU) 2016/399

☐
prolongation of border control at internal borders (foreseeable event): Article 25a(4) and (5) of Regulation (EU) 2016/399
Period(s) of previous reintroduction(s) of border control at internal borders:
Please indicate the dates of previous reintroductions of border control at internal borders.

☐
prolongation of border control at internal borders after 2 years, for major exceptional situation: Article 25a(6) of Regulation (EU) 2016/399
Period(s) of previous reintroduction(s) of border control at internal borders:
Please indicate the dates of previous reintroductions of border control at internal borders.

☐
prolongation of border control at internal borders after 2 years and 6 months, for major exceptional situation: Article 25a(6) of Regulation (EU) 2016/399
Period(s) of previous reintroduction(s) of border control at internal borders:
Please indicate the dates of previous reintroductions of border control at internal borders.

☐
reintroduction of border control at internal borders in accordance with a Council Implementing Decision: Article 28(1) and (5) of Regulation (EU) 2016/399

NB:
A continuation of a reintroduction of border control at the internal borders does not have to be considered a prolongation if the serious threat to public policy or internal security upon which it is based is different from the serious threat that motivated the preceding reintroduction of border control at the internal border. If this is the case, please notify for a first reintroduction and specify the new and distinct nature of the serious threat to public policy or internal security under 7.
6. If the notification for a foreseeable event is made less than four weeks before the planned reintroduction or prolongation of border control at internal borders (Article 25a(4), (5) and (6) of Regulation (EU) 2016/399):

Please indicate when the circumstances giving rise to the need to reintroduce or prolong border control at internal borders became known.

7. Serious threat to public policy or internal security, consisting of:

☐
terrorist incidents or threats, and threats posed by serious organised crime
Please specify and include all relevant data detailing the events that constitute a serious threat.

☐
large-scale public health emergencies
Please specify and include all relevant data detailing the events that constitute a serious threat.

☐
an exceptional situation characterised by sudden large-scale unauthorised movements of third country nationals, within the meaning of Article 25(1), point (c), of Regulation (EU) 2016/399
Please specify and include all relevant data detailing the events that constitute a serious threat.
Please include information as to the sudden nature of the large-scale unauthorised movement, the strain put on the resources and capacities of the competent authorities, the level of preparedness of the competent authorities, the likely risk to the overall functioning of the area without internal border control, and the available evidence from information analysis and all available data, including from relevant Union agencies.

☐
Large scale or high-profile international event
Please specify and include all relevant data detailing the events that constitute a serious threat.

☐
Other
Please specify and include all relevant data detailing the events that constitute a serious threat.

8. Names of authorised border crossing points

Please fill in or attach a separate file to the notification. If no list is provided, please explain.

9. Measures taken by other Member States (if applicable)

Please specify the measures adopted by other Member States in response to the reintroduction of border control at internal borders.

10. Assessment of necessity and proportionality under Article 26(1) of Regulation (EU) 2016/399

10.1. Appropriateness: explanation how the reintroduction of border control at internal borders is likely to adequately remedy the threat

10.2. Explanation why the objectives pursued by the reintroduction cannot be obtained by:
—
the use of alternative measures, such as proportionate checks carried out in the context of checks within the territory as referred to in Article 23, point (a), of Regulation (EU) 2016/399;
—
the use of the procedure laid down in Article 23a of Regulation (EU) 2016/399;
—
other forms of police cooperation provided for under Union law;
—
common measures regarding temporary restrictions on travel to the Member States as referred to in Article 21a(2) of Regulation (EU) 2016/399. 10.3. Likely impact on the movement of persons within the area without internal border control and the functioning of cross-border regions
Please include an overview of mitigating measures envisaged to limit the impact on the free movement of persons and the functioning of cross-border regions, in particular in relation to frontier workers and economic operators, waiting times and traffic congestion.
Please indicate which cross-border regions, as notified under Article 42b of Regulation (EU) 2016/399, are affected by the reintroduction of control at the internal border.
10.4. If the serious threat consists of sudden large-scale unauthorised movements (Article 25(1), point (c), and 27(3) of Regulation (EU) 2016/399):
Please provide a risk assessment and information on the sudden large-scale unauthorised movements, including any information obtained from Union Agencies and data analysis from relevant information systems.
Please include quantitative and qualitative data, including for example the number of applications for international protection and unauthorised movements, as well as information on to the sudden nature of the large-scale unauthorised movement, the strain put on the resources and capacities of the competent authorities, the level of preparedness of the competent authorities, the likely risk to the overall functioning of the area without internal border control.
10.5. Opinion of the Commission and consultation process (if applicable)
Please specify:
—
what action has been taken in response to opinion(s) of the Commission issued in accordance with Article 27a(2) or 27a(3) of Regulation (EU) 2016/399;
—
what action has been taken in response to the outcome of a consultation process established in accordance with Article 27a(4) of Regulation (EU) 2016/399.
11. If the notification concerns a prolongation of border control at internal borders after 6 months in accordance with Article 25a(5) of Regulation (EU) 2016/399 (Article 27(2) of Regulation (EU) 2016/399)

11.1. Assessment of the necessity and proportionality based on the criteria laid down in Article 26(1) of Regulation (EU) 2016/399
Please fill in point 10, taking into account the previous assessment of necessity and proportionality and the evolution of the serious threat since the reintroduction of border control at internal borders.
11.2. Scale and anticipated evolution of the serious threat
Please elaborate on the scale and anticipated evolution of the serious threat, in particular:
—
how long the serious threat is expected to persist;
—
which sections of the internal borders may be affected;
—
information regarding coordination measures with other Member States impacted or likely to be impacted by the border control at internal borders.

12. If the notification concerns a prolongation of border control at internal borders after 2 years, for a major exceptional situation (Article 25a(6) of Regulation (EU) 2016/399).

12.1. Assessment of the necessity and proportionality based on the criteria laid down in Article 26(2) of Regulation (EU) 2016/399
Please fill in point 11. 12.2. Action taken in response to an opinion of the Commission issued in accordance with Article 25a(6) of Regulation (EU) 2016/399 (if applicable)

12.3. Action taken in response to a consultation process initiated in accordance with Article 25a(6) of Regulation (EU) 2016/399 (if applicable)

12.4. Substantiation of the continued threat to public policy or internal security

12.5. Explanation why alternative measures are ineffective

12.6. Presentation of mitigating measures

12.7. Where appropriate: presentation of the means, actions, conditions and timeline with a view to lifting border control at internal borders

13. Any further information (optional)

For example:
—
details of strategic and operational cooperation with other Member States
—
details on to the use of alternative measures (Article 23 of Regulation (EU) 2016/399)
—
whether the procedure laid down in Article 23a of Regulation (EU) 2016/399 is applied at the time of reintroduction of border control at internal borders
—
bilateral or regional cooperation initiatives, including with third countries

14. Withholding of information on grounds of public security (Article 27(5) of Regulation (EU) 2016/399)

Please indicate, to the extent that grounds of public security allow, whether any information has been withheld justified on public security grounds, taking into account the confidentiality of ongoing investigations.
Please indicate whether any of the notified information, in whole or in part has been classified under national law.

15. Confidentiality of information (Article 35 of Regulation (EU) 2016/399)

Please indicate and specify if any of the notified information is to remain confidential.