It is funny though how Airbus highlights on their website the items that the panel has found were not proven and ignores the items that were proven. For a balanced argument here I copy the items that were proven:
8.1 In light of the findings set out in the foregoing sections of our Report, we conclude that the United States has established the following concerning the existence of subsidies:
(a) concerning the provision of LA/MSF;
(i) that each of the challenged LA/MSF measures constitutes a specific subsidy
within the meaning of Articles 1 and 2 of the SCM Agreement, and
(ii) that the German, Spanish and UK A380 LA/MSF measures are subsidies
contingent in fact upon anticipated export performance, and therefore
prohibited export subsidies within the meaning of Article 3.1(a) and
footnote 4 of the SCM Agreement.
(b) concerning the provision of infrastructure and infrastructure-related grants;
(i) that the provision of the Mühlenberger Loch site constitutes a specific
subsidy within the meaning of Articles 1 and 2 of the SCM Agreement,
(ii) that the provision of the lengthened Bremen Airport Runway constitutes a
specific subsidy within the meaning of Articles 1 and 2 of the
SCM Agreement,
(iii) that the provision of the ZAC Aéroconstellation site and associated EIG
facilities constitutes a specific subsidy within the meaning of Articles 1 and 2
of the SCM Agreement, and
(iv) that challenged grants provided by authorities in Germany and Spain for the
construction of manufacturing and assembly facilities in Nordenham,
Germany, and Sevilla, La Rinconada, Toledo, Puerto de Santa Maria and
Puerto Real, Spain, and by the governments of Andalusia and Castilla-La
Mancha to Airbus in Puerto Real, Sevilla, and Illescas (Toledo) are specific
subsidies within the meaning of Articles 1 and 2 of the SCM Agreement.
(c) concerning the German government's transfer of its ownership share in Deutsche
Airbus to the Daimler Group;
(i) that the 1989 acquisition by KfW of a 20 percent equity interest in Deutsche
Airbus is a specific subsidy within the meaning of Articles 1 and 2 of the
SCM Agreement, and
(ii) that the 1992 transfer by KfW of its 20 percent equity interest in Deutsche
Airbus to MBB is a specific subsidy within the meaning of Articles 1 and 2
of the SCM Agreement.
(d) concerning the equity infusions that the French government and Crédit Lyonnais
provided to Aérospatiale;
(i) that the 1987, 1988, 1992 and 1994 equity infusions to Aérospatiale are
specific subsidies within the meaning of Articles 1 and 2 of the
SCM Agreement, and
(ii) that the 1998 transfer by the French government of its 45.76 percent interest
in Dassault Aviation to Aérospatiale is a specific subsidy within the meaning
of Articles 1 and 2 of the SCM Agreement.
(e) concerning the research and technological development funding provided by the
European Communities and certain EC member States;
(i) that grants under the Second, Third, Fourth, Fifth and Sixth EC Framework
Programmes identified in Annexes I.1, I.2, I.3, I.4 and I.5 are specific
subsidies within the meaning of Articles 1 and 2 of the SCM Agreement,
(ii) that French government grants amounting to a maximum of EUR 391 million
between 1986 and 1993 and EUR [***] between 1994 and 2005 are specific
subsidies within the meaning of Articles 1 and 2 of the SCM Agreement,
(iii) that German Federal government grants under the LuFo I, LuFo II and LuFo
III programmes amounting to EUR [***] are specific subsidies within the
meaning of Articles 1 and 2 of the SCM Agreement,
(iv) that German sub-Federal government grants amounting to EUR [***] from
the Bavarian authorities under the OZB and Bayerisches
Luftfahrtforschungsprogramm, EUR 11 million from the Bremen authorities
under the AMST programmes, and EUR [***] from the Hamburg authorities
under the Luftfahrtforschungsprogramm are specific subsidies within the
meaning of Articles 1 and 2 of the SCM Agreement,
(v) that loans under the Spanish government PROFIT and PTA programmes
amounting to, respectively, EUR 62.2 million and EUR [***], are specific
subsidies within the meaning of Articles 1 and 2 of the SCM Agreement, and
(vi) that UK government grants under the CARAD and ARP programmes
amounting to GBP [***] are specific subsidies within the meaning of
Articles 1 and 2 of the SCM Agreement.
8.2 Furthermore, in light of the findings set out in the foregoing sections of our Report, we
conclude that the United States has established the following with respect to adverse effects:
(a) that the effect of the subsidies is to displace the imports of a like product of the
United States into the European market within the meaning of Article 6.3(a) of the
SCM Agreement, constituting serious prejudice to the interests of the United States
within the meaning of Article 5(c) of the SCM Agreement,
(b) that the effect of the subsidies is to displace the exports of a like product of the
United States from the markets of Australia, Brazil, China, Chinese Taipei, Korea,
Mexico, and Singapore within the meaning of Article 6.3(b) of the SCM Agreement,
constituting serious prejudice to the interests of the United States within the meaning
of Article 5(c) of the SCM Agreement,
(c) that the effect of the subsidies is likely displacement of exports of a like product of the United States from the market of India within the meaning of Article 6.3(b) of the SCM Agreement, constituting a threat of serious prejudice to the interests of the
United States within the meaning of Article 5(c) of the SCM Agreement, and
(d) that the effect of the subsidies is significant lost sales in the same market within the meaning of Article 6.3(c) of the SCM Agreement, constituting serious prejudice to the interests of the United States within the meaning of Article 5(c) of the
SCM Agreement.