As a general rule, the agreement specifies that certain things are expressly excluded from the plan, so that the worker, for example, does not renounce the pension rights he has acquired and is free to assert a right to harm the person because of an injury sustained during his or her activity, which he or she is not currently aware of. With regard to the procedure followed with this taxpayer, Belgium adds that tax treaties are fundamental instruments of VAT, widely recognised in scientific work and case law and expressly provided for in Article 84 of the VAT Code. Counts are therefore an essential part of the procedure itself and are available to all subjects, without exception. Accordingly, Umicore considers it wrong to characterize the terms of a transaction as “benefit” unless a party would devalue a clearly higher result from that comparison than it would expect from litigation. With regard to the specificity test, Belgium points out that, contrary to what the Commission put forward in its decision to open the procedure, the mere circumstance is not sufficient to argue that the specificity test is met. In determining whether there was a concrete benefit, the measure should be assessed in light of the treatment of businesses in physical and legal circumstances similar to those of the allegedly beneficiary company. Third, a transaction agreement does not, by its very nature, grant any benefit that can be covered by state aid rules. Any compromise decision is, by definition, to assess the risks to each of the parties involved by comparing a specific and immediate payment to the presumed or possible outcome of a dispute. Elering as a transport network manager (TSO) is responsible for balancing the Estonian gas system and clearing system with those responsible for the balance sheet. The open supply contract between the balance sheet provider and the TSO is called the pay agreement.