CISAF and the Future of Clean Industry in Europe: A Lawyer’s Perspective on Strategic State Aid

The European Commission’s adoption of the Clean Industrial Solutions Aid Framework (CISAF) marks a significant recalibration of the EU’s approach to industrial policy, State aid, and the green transition. More than just a replacement for the Temporary Crisis and Transition Framework (TCTF), CISAF represents the Commission’s attempt to institutionalise climate-aligned State support through a structured and legally robust framework—one that is built for predictability, scalability, and long-term impact. CISAF is a rare example of the Commission acknowledging that meeting climate targets will require not just ambitious policy, but also agile legal mechanisms to operationalise public funding at scale—without breaching the core principles of competition law.

From Crisis Response to Industrial Policy: A Shift in Legal Design

CISAF moves away from the reactive posture of the TCTF and towards a more proactive and strategic use of State aid. The framework, which will apply until 31 December 2030, provides a legal basis for Member States to subsidise clean energy and technology investments with fewer procedural hurdles. This is not merely administrative streamlining—it reflects a deeper shift in legal thinking. The Commission is signaling that selective public support for decarbonisation is now an accepted, even encouraged, facet of lawful economic intervention. CISAF offers a more stable compliance environment. The rules are clearer. The eligible categories are broader and, more importantly, the mechanisms are more flexible.

Legal Certainty Meets Market Complexity

CISAF explicitly authorises aid in areas such as renewable energy, low-carbon fuels, decarbonisation of industrial processes, clean tech manufacturing, and risk mitigation for infrastructure investments. Yet it does so without prescribing a single model. Aid can be granted through fixed caps (e.g., up to €200 million per project), competitive bidding, or funding gap analysis. This layered approach introduces legal optionality—and with it, a need for careful structuring of support schemes to ensure proportionality, transparency, and compatibility with overarching EU law. Particularly interesting is the framework’s approach to hydrogen and other low-carbon fuels. These are acknowledged as essential technologies for the decarbonisation of hard-to-abate sectors. From a legal standpoint, this constitutes de facto recognition of their strategic value, opening the door for faster approvals and more generous aid intensities under simplified procedures. The same is true for energy cost support granted to energy-intensive undertakings. The framework permits targeted electricity price relief—but imposes a legal condition: companies must commit to decarbonisation investments. In other words, the aid is conditional and reciprocal, embedding a policy purpose into the legal structure of the subsidy. This is a smart compromise between competitiveness and environmental integrity.

Clean Tech Manufacturing, Strategic Autonomy, and the New Industrial Mandate

Another legal innovation lies in CISAF’s treatment of manufacturing capacity for clean technologies. Projects falling within the scope of the Net-Zero Industry Act are presumed to be eligible for support—either under approved schemes or, in exceptional cases, on a standalone basis. This offers a strong legal basis for Member States to intervene when there is a credible risk of industrial offshoring. This shift matters. It reflects an emerging consensus that competition law, while foundational, must now accommodate a degree of strategic autonomy. In practice, this means that support for electrolyser factories, battery plants, and raw material processing facilities can be justified not only on market failure grounds, but on policy necessity.

Moreover, CISAF explicitly recognises that de-risking private capital is essential to unlocking large-scale investment in clean infrastructure. For transactional lawyers, this creates a pathway for structuring public-private partnerships through equity participations, subordinated debt, or guarantee mechanisms. The inclusion of special purpose vehicles (SPVs) and dedicated investment funds as vehicles for lawful State support is particularly noteworthy, and opens doors to creative deal structuring within a compliant State aid perimeter.

Fiscal Levers and Demand-Side Interventions

One of CISAF’s quieter strengths is its allowance for tax-based instruments. Accelerated tax deductions for clean tech investments are now formally recognised as an eligible measure. This creates room for Member States to design fiscal incentives that encourage private deployment of green assets—complementing direct grants or price supports. From a legal policy perspective, this introduces a more comprehensive toolkit. It acknowledges that the energy transition is not just about building supply—it’s also about creating market demand and making green business models commercially viable.

Strategic Implications for the Greek Market

For Greece, CISAF is an inflection point—if we choose to act. The country’s renewable energy profile, particularly in solar and offshore wind, is strong. But historically, Greece has struggled to convert its natural advantages into investment-ready projects, often due to bureaucratic friction and legal ambiguity around aid eligibility. CISAF provides a framework to address these challenges. It provides legal clarity and procedural streamlining that national authorities can leverage to support flagship projects. Moreover, under the EU’s regional aid maps, large swathes of the country are eligible for higher aid intensities—especially areas like Western Macedonia, which are already undergoing transition away from lignite-based energy production. Crucially, the manufacturing provisions could reposition Greece within the European clean tech supply chain. With the right combination of State-backed guarantees, streamlined licensing, and legal certainty for investors, Greece could attract assembly lines, storage component factories, or even early-stage hydrogen production facilities. The onus is now on Greek policymakers, legal advisors, and industry stakeholders to treat CISAF not just as a compliance obligation—but as a strategic opportunity.