Hvad angår Tysklands andet argument om, at undtagelsen i KStG's § 8c, stk. 1a, fra det generelle forbud mod underskudfremførsel i tilfælde af en ændring af ejerforholdene i KStG's § 8c, stk. 1, er berettiget som følge af formålet med KStG's § 8c, stk. 1, da der ikke er nogen risiko for misbrug i forbindelse med omstruktureringen af en kriseramt virksomhed, konstaterer Kommissionen, at dette argument ikke begrunder, at KStG's § 8c, stk. 1a, begrænses til kriseramte virksomheder.
With regard to Germany’s second argument, that the exception provided in §8c(1a) KStG to the general prohibition on loss carry-forward in the event of a change of ownership laid down by §8c(1) KStG was justified by the ratio legis of §8c(1) KStG, because there was no risk of abuse in the case of the restructuring of a company in difficulty, the Commission observes that this argument does not justify the restriction of §8c(1a) KStG to companies in difficulty.