N79969, DaimlerChrysler doesn't get loans - they get (or got) pure subsidies: money that did and does not have to be repaid.
While I was digging around the German government's website, I came accross a document called "Subventionsbericht 2001" (report on subsidies for the year of 2001), as well as a release about the publishing of the same report in 2003 - and in both, I found a paragraph that probably explains a bit of the discussion going back and forth between the US and Europe, because it gives a definition of what is considered a subsidy:
Der Begriff "Subventionen" steht für zwei verschiedene Dinge: Bei Finanzhilfen handelt es sich um Geldleistungen des Bundes an Stellen außerhalb der Bundesverwaltung für begrenzte Zwecke, so zum Beispiel die Finanzhilfen des Bundes für den Bergbau, Hilfen für das Wohnungswesen und für die Landwirtschaft oder die Gemeinschaftsaufgabe regionale Wirtschaftsförderung für neue und alte Bundesländer. Steuervergünstigungen sind spezielle steuerliche Ausnahmeregelungen, so zum Beispiel die Ausnahmeregelungen bei der ökologischen Steuerreform und die Entwicklung der Steuermindereinnahmen aus der Eigenheimzulage, die für den Bund zu Mindereinnahmen führen.
Unfortunately, I was not able to locate the same document in English, so I'll try out a translation here:
Explanation of the Term Subsidy
The term "Subsidy" represents two different things: in the case of financial aid, it represents monies provided by the Federal Government for specific needs, for example Federal aid for the mining industry, as well as the housing industry, agriculture or the Unionwide program of regional economic development aid for the old and new German states. Tax credits are special tax exemptions, for example exemptions introduced by the Ecological Tax Reform as well as the development of reduced Federal Tax-income caused by the Home-Owners-Tax-Credit.
This goes back to one of the previous discussions, the one where some were arguing that tax-credits weren't subsidies - while, as this paragraph shows, they are considered a subsidy in Europe.
By the way - the full document, unfortunately only in German, can be found here: http://www.bundesregierung.de/dokumente/-,413.533883/Artikel/dokument.htm
So I guess that before any real agreement can be reached, a solution to this dilemma will have to be found - because it will be quite difficult to reach a solution without both sides agreeing on the most basic principles.
Then there's also the organisational difference between Europe and the US: the US is a country, while the EU is an organisation - although there are some quite obvious similarities: the US has a federal government that has a say in some matters, but not in all matters - the states, for example, are free to offer tax credits to companies residing withing their borders, without the Federal Government being able to block this (I hope I remember this correctly).
The EU equivalent to the US' Federal Government, for this purpose, is the EU Commission, the equivalent to the state's governments would, in this case, be the governments of the member countries of the EU - the member countries can (and do) also offer incentives to companies residing within their borders. While this is often done by states within the countries, these aid packages are almost never handled by the state alone, but practically always involve, here in Germany at least, the Federal Government: case in point, the Volkswagen-Legislation in Lower Saxony - the EU commission did not sue Lower Saxony, but Germany.
The main problem arising from these organisational differences is that, even if - for example - Hamburg gave Airbus a large tax credit, they could still be prevented from doing so by the EU, while Washington giving Boeing a tax-credit for keeping the B7e7 production in-state is, by quite a large number of peope, seen as something completely removed from any discussion about subsidies.
And this difference in the approach toward an agreement will probably be another one of the big problems: on, geographically speaking, our side, you've got the EU commission speaking for not just the member countries but also the states that these member countries are made up of, while on the US side, you've got the Federal Government speaking for itself, while later on being able to turn around and say "Well, that money isn't coming from us, that's the state giving money - and we cannot influence that".
As for European research not available to non-European companies - while I'm not sure about it, I do somehow doubt that institutes such as DLR and Max-Planck-Institut would not provide Boeing with their research if they asked for it... but, as I've mentioned, I'm not really sure about that part.
Ok - sorry that this post turned out to be a bit on the long side...