Saving the Battery Plant
The city of Bitterfeld-Wolfen in Saxony-Anhalt has 82,000 inhabitants and an unemployment rate of 10.4%. A battery cell plant employing 1,650 people is the anchor of the local economy; 38 local suppliers depend on it. The parent company says the plant will close unless it receives EUR 110 million in state aid by 31 March. It has an offer from Poland worth EUR 70 million. The Land government proposes a EUR 110 million grant, co-financed by the federal government and the EU regional fund. The European Commission has opened a preliminary state-aid review. Local unions demand the subsidy; an ordoliberal economists' council warns of 'preserving outdated structures' and a 'subsidy race' with Poland. The plant's technology is currently competitive, but demand is volatile. Forty percent of employees are over 50, and only 18% have vocational qualifications in battery chemistry. The city council must pass a resolution supporting the grant.
1. Assess the proposed subsidy using the principles of the Social Market Economy and EU state-aid rules.
Read the worked answer
The Social Market Economy treats competition as the main discovery procedure but permits state intervention where markets fail or where structural change imposes unacceptable social costs. A battery plant closure involves regional externalities: supplier jobs, sunk infrastructure, and a loss of industrial competence. But it also involves a risk of subsidy competition with Poland. EU state-aid law allows aid only under exceptions such as regional aid, rescue and restructuring aid, or important projects of common European interest. The Commission will ask whether the aid is necessary, proportionate, and has an incentive effect: would the plant remain or locate here without the grant? A EUR 110 million grant to one firm is defensible only if several conditions are met. The plant needs a credible transformation plan, not just a liquidity gap. Aid should be conditional on maintaining employment, investing in skills, and meeting environmental standards. There should be clawback if targets are missed. It should be time-limited and not become open-ended operating aid. The ordoliberal objection is partly right: subsidies can preserve outdated structures and invite a race with other countries. But the social market economy also requires cushioning structural change. Conditional support may therefore be justified, but pure preservation is not. If the plant can survive only with permanent subsidy, the better use of public money is a social plan and regional diversification.
2. Recommend an alternative policy mix if the grant is rejected, and explain the criteria you use to judge it.
Read the worked answer
If the grant is rejected, the city and Land should negotiate a social plan with unions, use short-time work where possible, and fund retraining in battery chemistry, electro-technology, and grid components. The site could be converted for battery recycling or grid infrastructure, and suppliers should receive advice on diversification. Federal structural funds and EU just-transition money could support transport links and a technology park. The criteria are efficiency, social cohesion, fiscal cost, and ecological transformation. Efficiency means avoiding permanent subsidies to a firm that cannot compete. Social cohesion means protecting workers and the local tax base during transition. Fiscal cost means comparing the EUR 110 million grant with the cost of unemployment benefits, lost tax revenue, and outmigration. Ecological transformation means linking support to low-carbon production. The short-term costs of rejection are real, but they may be lower than a long-term dependency trap. A conditional bridge package with a clear exit date is preferable to an unconditional grant.