natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
For det tredje: Frankrig og nogle af de interesserede parter påstår, at den foreliggende ordnings ikke-selektive karakter godtgøres ved, at de franske myndigheder ikke kan gøre brug af skønsmæssige beføjelser, når de skal indrømme en godkendelse.
Thirdly, France and some interested parties claim that the non-selective character of the scheme at issue is established by the lack of discretionary power on the part of the French authorities when it comes to granting approval.
Kommissionen gør opmærksom på, at selv foranstaltninger, som ved første øjekast gælder for alle virksomheder, i henhold til retspraksis kan have en vis selektivitet og derfor betragtes som foranstaltninger, der begunstiger visse virksomheder eller produktioner.
The Commission would point out that, according to the case law, even interventions which, prima facie, apply to undertakings in general may be to a certain extent selective and, accordingly, be regarded as measures designed to favour certain undertakings or the production of certain goods.
Det er navnlig tilfældet, når de myndigheder, der skal anvende den generelle bestemmelse, besidder en vis skønsmæssig beføjelse med hensyn til lovens anvendelse.
That is the case, in particular, where the administration called upon to apply a general rule has a discretionary power so far as concerns the application of the measure at issue.
Det skal i det foreliggende tilfælde fastslås, at den omhandlede skatteforanstaltning kun er åben for brugere af bestemte aktiver og medlemmer af de firmagrupper, der finansierer disse aktiver, og de facto kun begunstiger transport- og finanssektoren, og betingelsen om specificitet er derfor opfyldt.
In the present case, it should be pointed out straight away that, inasmuch as the tax measure at issue can benefit only the users of certain assets and the members of the EIGs financing them and in fact benefits mainly the transport and financial sectors, the condition of specificity is already fulfilled.
Andre finansieringsprojekter vedrørende aktiver fra andre sektorer end transportsektoren, og/eller hvis afskrivningsperiode er på under otte år, kan indeholde garantier, der udelukker ethvert ønske om skatteoptimering.
Other financing schemes, concerning assets in sectors other than transport and/or having a depreciation period of less than eight years, might include safeguards of such a character as to rule out any attempt at tax optimisation.
I lyset af denne skatteforanstaltnings begrænsede anvendelsesområde er det ikke nødvendigt for at fastslå den omstridte foranstaltnings selektive karakter at konstatere, at de kompetente nationale myndigheder har en skønsmæssig beføjelse i den nævnte foranstaltning.
Consequently, in view of the limited scope of this tax measure, it is not necessary, in order to establish the selective character of the measure, to determine whether the competent national authorities have a discretionary power in the measure’s application.
Adspurgt om omfanget af den kontrol, som de franske myndigheder er forpligtede til at gennemføre, i forbindelse med betingelsen om, hvorvidt en investering er af betydelig økonomisk og social interesse generelt og især for beskæftigelsen, har de franske myndigheder anført, at denne interesse vurderes i forhold til seks kriterier, hvoraf et er baseret på »investeringens indvirkning på det økonomiske miljø i det område, den foretages, og brugeren operer«.
When questioned about the scope of the examination they carry out to establish whether the investment in question is of significant economic and social interest both in general and from an employment standpoint in particular, the French authorities stated that that interest was determined in the light of six criteria, including that of ‘the impact of the investment on the economic environment of the area in which it is to be carried out and in which the user operates’.
Kommissionen finder imidlertid, at de nationale myndigheder i vurderingen af, om denne betingelse er opfyldt, har en skønsmæssig beføjelse.
In the Commission’s opinion, the assessment of that criterion necessarily involves giving the national authorities a margin of discretion.
Til trods for at en sådan målsætning er helt legitim, skal det anføres, at der ikke er nogen forbindelse mellem denne betingelse, dvs. om at investeringen skal være af økonomisk interesse, og lovgivningsmyndighedens tilsigtede formål med kravet om en forudgående ministeriel godkendelse før investeringens gennemførelse.
Despite the legitimacy of such a goal, there is no link between this criterion as to the existence of an economic interest on the part of the investment and the objective sought by the legislature in making the carrying out of the investment subject to the prior grant of ministerial approval.
Betingelserne for at få indrømmet godkendelsen skal gøre det muligt at fastslå, at adgangen til ordningen med finansiering gennem firmagrupper ikke tager sigte på skatteoptimering.
The criteria governing the grant of approval are said to be intended to help establish that recourse to the method of financing via an EIG does not pursue any tax optimisation goal.
Men betingelsen om, at investeringen skal være af økonomisk interesse, hindrer ikke en sådan skatteoptimering.
The criterion as to the economic interest of the investment is, however, not likely to prevent such optimisation.
Til trods for afskrivningsperioden for de pågældende aktiver er det muligt, at sådanne finansieringstransaktioner ikke sigter mod skatteoptimering, men det betyder ikke nødvendigvis, at de er af betydelig økonomisk og social interesse, især i henseende til beskæftigelse.
Irrespective of the period of depreciation of the assets concerned, such financing operations may well not pursue any tax optimisation goal, but this does not necessarily mean that they are deprived of any significant economic and social interest primarily in terms of employment.
Her skal der atter henvises til Senatets rapport nr. 413, hvoraf det fremgår, at betingelsen om en betydelig økonomisk og social interesse er »et middel til at fremme aktiver produceret på nationalt område eller finansieringer til fordel for en fransk bruger«.
Reference may be made once more here to Senate Report No 413, which states that the criterion as to the existence of a significant economic and social interest is ‘a means to promote goods manufactured in France or financing operations for the benefit of a French user’.
Mere generelt kan det for øvrigt læses i rapporten, at godkendelsesproceduren giver myndighederne en for stor skønsmargen.
More generally, the report also states that the approval procedure leaves the authorities too wide a margin of discretion.
Det forhold, at betingelsen om investeringens økonomiske interesse er utilstrækkelig i forhold til det tilsigtede mål, bestyrker med andre ord ifølge Kommissionen de nationale myndigheders skønsmargen.
The unsuitability of the criterion as to the economic interest of the investment in the light of the objective pursued therefore increases, in the Commission's opinion, the margin of discretion enjoyed by the national authorities in its application.
Stadig med hensyn til de franske myndigheders skønsmargen i vurderingen af anmodninger om godkendelse skal det konstateres, at det franske forfatningsråds beslutning af 30. december 1987, som de franske myndigheder og nogle af de interesserede parter har henvist til, ikke er relevant i denne sammenhæng.
Still concerning the margin of discretion enjoyed by the French authorities for approval granting purposes, it should be noted that the Constitutional Council decision of 30 December 1987, which was referred to by the French authorities and some interested parties, is irrelevant in the present context.
I den sag drejede det sig om en skatteforanstaltning, der giver en ny juridisk person, som er oprettet efter en sammenlægning af to selskaber, mulighed for i en begrænset periode at overtage hele eller dele af de to fusionerede selskabers underskud. Samtidig blev det muligt at fratrække underskud, som ikke var trukket fra forud for fusionen, i efterfølgende overskud, dog forudsat at der forelå en godkendelse fra finansministeriet, og det skete inden for rammerne af denne godkendelse.
What was involved in that instance was a tax measure which provided that a new legal person resulting from the merger of two companies could take over for a limited period all or part of the losses of the merged companies and that, in the event of the partial contribution of capital to a company in the group, any losses not yet deducted before the merger could be set off, with the approval of the Minister for the Budget and within the limits of that approval, against any future profits.
Forfatningsrådet var blevet anmodet om at udtale sig om, hvorvidt denne godkendelsesprocedure var i overensstemmelse med forfatningens artikel 34, som giver lovgivningsmyndigheden beføjelse til at fastlægge en skattebegunstigelses anvendelsesområde.
The Constitutional Council was asked to rule on the conformity of that approval procedure with Article 34 of the Constitution, which entrusts to the legislature the task of determining the scope of a tax advantage.
Forfatningsrådet fandt, at den pågældende bestemmelse ikke gav lovgivningsmyndigheden mulighed for at uddelegere sine skattemæssige beføjelser til ministeriet, og at sidstnævnte alene fik beføjelse til at sikre overholdelse af de i loven fastsatte betingelser i overensstemmelse med lovgivningsmyndighedens målsætning om at hindre skatteunddragelser.
It held that the measure in question did not allow the legislature to subdelegate its taxation powers to the Minister and that the latter had conferred on him only the power to ensure, in keeping with the legislature's objective of preventing tax avoidance, that the conditions laid down by law were met.
Forfatningsrådet udtalte sig i denne beslutning om hhv. den lovgivende og den regeludstedende magt på skatteområdet, men på ingen måde om, at ministeriet skulle have en skønsmæssig beføjelse i forbindelse med vedtagelsen af de enkeltstående foranstaltninger, der er nødvendige for lovens gennemførelse.
On that occasion, what the Constitutional Council was being called on to do was to rule on compliance with the respective powers of the legislative and regulatory authorities in tax matters and not at all on whether the Minister had a discretionary power when adopting the individual measures needed to implement the law.
Kommissionen mener under alle omstændigheder, at betingelserne i traktatens artikel 87, stk. 1, ikke kan tilsidesættes af de nationale domstoles retspraksis.
In any event, the Commission considers that the conditions of Article 87(1) of the Treaty cannot be called into question by decisions of national courts.
For det fjerde: Argumentet om at de nationale myndigheder ikke har beføjelse til at træffe vilkårlige beslutninger, eftersom deres beslutning kan indankes for de nationale domstole for at få afklaret begrundelsen for afslaget på godkendelse; her skal der erindres om, at det ikke er nødvendigt at kontrollere, om skattemyndighedernes adfærd er vilkårlig, for at afgøre, om en foranstaltning er eller ikke er generel.
Fourthly, in response to the argument that the national authorities did not have arbitrary power since their decisions could be appealed against before the national courts with a view to reviewing the grounds for withholding approval, it should be pointed out that, in order to preclude characterisation as a general measure, it is not necessary to determine whether the conduct of the tax administration is arbitrary.
Det er tilstrækkeligt at konstatere, at den pågældende myndighed har en skønsmæssig beføjelse, der gør det muligt for den at tilpasse betingelserne for godkendelse af skattebegunstigelsen på baggrund af de enkeltstående investeringsforslag, der indgives til godkendelse.
It need only be established that the administration has a discretionary power enabling it to vary the conditions for granting the tax concession in question according to the characteristics of the investment project submitted for its assessment.
Det er desuden blevet fastslået, at eftergivelse af gæld i henhold til en retsprocedure og i overensstemmelse med gældende national lovgivning er af selektiv karakter, eftersom de ikke er en automatisk følge af lovens anvendelse, men et resultat af de pågældende offentlige organers skønsmæssige valg.
It has been ruled, moreover, that debt remissions granted in the course of judicial proceedings and in accordance with the applicable national law were selective in character as they did not flow automatically from the application of the law, but from the discretionary decisions made by the public bodies in question.
Fællesskabets retsinstans erindrer i denne sammenhæng om, at der i traktatens artikel 87, stk. 1, ikke sondres mellem årsager til eller målsætninger for de statslige indgreb, men at de fastlægges ud fra deres følger.
In making this ruling, the Court again made it clear that Article 87(1) of the Treaty does not distinguish between measures of state intervention by reference to their causes or aims but defines them in relation to their effects.
Men det forhold, at afgørelser om afslag på godkendelser kan indankes for en national domstol, ændrer ikke ved, at de nationale myndigheder har en skønsmargen i forbindelse med anvendelsen af betingelserne for at få en ministeriel godkendelse.
In the present case, a fortiori, the fact that decisions withholding approval may be appealed against before a national court cannot call into question the existence of a margin of discretion on the part of the national authorities in applying the ministerial approval grant criteria.
Og endelig mener Kommissionen, at de franske myndigheders påstand om, at der ikke sondres mellem medlemmerne af firmagruppens og brugernes nationalitet, ændrer ikke ved, at ordningen under skattelovens artikel 39 CA er af selektiv karakter, så meget desto mere som det fremgår af Senatets rapport nr. 413, at betingelsen om at investeringen skal have en betydelig økonomisk og social interesse, er »et middel til at fremme aktiver produceret på nationalt område eller finansieringer til fordel for en fransk bruger«.
Lastly, the Commission considers that the French authorities’ argument centred on the absence of a distinction based on the nationality of the members of an EIG and of users likewise does not call into question the selective character of the scheme provided for in Article 39 CA of the General Tax Code, especially since Senate Report No 413 states that the condition as to the existence of a significant economic and social interest of the investment is ‘a means to promote goods manufactured in France or financing operations for the benefit of a French user’.
På baggrund af ovenstående mener Kommissionen derfor, at ordningen under den franske skattelovs artikel 39 CA er af selektiv karakter.
In the light of the above, the Commission considers that the scheme provided for in Article 39 CA of the General Tax Code is selective in character.
Om relevansen af undtagelsen baseret på skattesystemets karakter og forvaltning
The relevance of the exception based on the nature and overall structure of the tax system
De franske myndigheder gør gældende, at de samlede bestemmelser i artikel 39 C, stk. 2, og 39 CA i skatteloven giver skattevæsenet mulighed for at foretage en forudgående kontrol med henblik på at bekæmpe skatteunddragelse som følge af misbrug af transaktioner til finansiering af løsøre foretaget af skattemæssigt gennemsigtige strukturer som firmagrupper.
The French authorities claim that the combined provisions of the second paragraph of Article 39 C and Article 39 CA of the General Tax Code are a means of ex ante control by the tax authorities aimed at combating tax avoidance through the abuse of movable asset financing operations by tax-transparent structures such as EIGs.
De mener, at skattesystemets karakter og opbygning dermed berettiger ordningen i henhold til artikel 39 CA i skatteloven.
They consider that the scheme provided for in Article 39 CA of the General Tax Code is thus justified by the nature and overall structure of the tax system.
De understreger i den forbindelse, at ordningen i henhold til artikel 39 CA i skatteloven »bygger på objektive og horisontale kriterier for bekæmpelse af skatteunddragelse«.
They state in this connection that the scheme provided for in Article 39 CA of the General Tax Code is ‘based on objective, horizontal tax avoidance combating criteria’.
Ganske vist omfatter begrebet statsstøtte ikke statslige foranstaltninger, hvorved der indføres en differentiering mellem virksomheder, når denne differentiering følger af den pågældende byrdeordnings karakter eller opbygning, og som disse foranstaltninger er en del af.
It is true that the definition of state aid does not include national measures introducing a differentiation between undertakings when that differentiation arises from the nature and overall structure of the system of charges of which they form part.
Den omstændighed, at en støtteforanstaltning kan være begrundet i skattesystemets karakter eller opbygning, henviser til en konkret skattemæssig foranstaltnings overensstemmelse med det generelle skattesystems art og indretning.
This justification based on the nature or overall structure of the tax system reflects the consistency of a specific tax measure with the internal logic of the tax system in general.
Men afgiftsdifferentiering må ikke blot være dikteret af generelle formål og målsætninger, som staten fremmer ved at indføre de pågældende foranstaltninger.
However, tax differentiations cannot be simply dictated by the general aims and objectives pursued by the State in adopting the measures in question.
I den foreliggende sag mener Kommissionen, at artikel 39 C, stk. 2, i skatteloven begrænser det fradragsberettigede afskrivningsbeløb og dermed faktisk sigter mod at bekæmpe skattemæssigt gennemsigtige strukturers misbrug med det formål at få en skattemæssig gevinst i forbindelse med transaktioner til finansiering af aktiver, der udlejes eller stilles til rådighed.
In the present case, the Commission considers that, by limiting the amount of deductible depreciation, the second paragraph of Article 39 C of the General Tax Code does in fact seek to combat abusive recourse to tax-transparent structures with a view to achieving a tax saving as part of operations to finance assets leased out or otherwise made available.
Dette formål forekommer nødvendigt og rationelt med henblik på at sikre, at skattesystemet fungerer effektivt med hensyn til afskrivninger på aktiver, der udlejes eller stilles til rådighed, og må som følge heraf betragtes som grundlæggende for det nævnte system.
That objective is clearly necessary and rational for purposes of ensuring the effectiveness of the scheme of tax-deductible depreciation of assets leased out or otherwise made available and must therefore be considered to form an inherent part of the said scheme.
Derimod kan ordningen i henhold til artikel 39 CA i skatteloven ikke begrundes i karakteren og opbygningen af de franske afskrivningsregler for aktiver, der udlejes eller stilles til rådighed.
On the other hand, the scheme provided for in Article 39 CA of the General Tax Code cannot be justified by the nature and overall structure of the French system of depreciation of assets leased out or otherwise made available.
Selvom der tillades undtagelser fra det principielle loft over afskrivninger i henhold til artikel 39 C, stk. 2, i skatteloven, må disse undtagelser udelukkende baseres på betingelser, der efter opfyldelse skal kunne forhindre, at skattemæssigt gennemsigtige strukturer såsom firmagrupper, finansierer de pågældende aktiver med henblik på skatteoptimering.
Although derogations from the ceiling in principle on depreciation provided for in the second paragraph of Article 39 C of the General Tax Code are admissible, they should be based only on criteria the fulfilment of which would be capable of preventing recourse, for tax optimisation purposes, to the financing of the said assets by means of tax-transparent structures such as EIGs.
Men for det første kan man ikke begrunde begrænsningen af anvendelsesområdet for den pågældende undtagelse til finansiering af afskrivningsberettigede aktiver over en periode på mindst otte år selv eller kombineret med de øvrige betingelser for at opnå godkendelse i henhold til de franske myndigheders mål.
Firstly, the limitation of the scope of the derogation in question to the financing of assets depreciable over a period of at least eight years cannot be justified, either in itself or in combination with the other approval grant criteria, in the light of the objective pursued by the French authorities.
De franske myndigheder har i øvrigt ikke i forbindelse med denne administrative procedure givet nogen forklaring på, hvorfor de i forhold til målet om at bekæmpe skatteunddragelse har valgt at begrænse denne undtagelse til aktiver med en sådan afskrivningsperiode.
During the course of the present administrative procedure, those authorities have provided no explanation as to why, in the light of the objective of combating tax avoidance, the derogation was limited to assets having such a depreciation period.
For det andet har de nationale myndigheder, som det tidligere er konstateret, en skønsmargin i kraft af betingelserne for at få ministeriel tilladelse, navnlig dén om, at der i forbindelse med finansieringstransaktionen skal foreligge en økonomisk og social, bl.a. beskæftigelsesmæssig, interesse.
Secondly, as indicated above, of the ministerial approval grant criteria, that which relates to the existence on the part of the financing operation of an economic and social interest, particularly in relation to employment, leaves the national authorities a margin of discretion.
Denne betingelse er i øvrigt uden forbindelse med Frankrigs mål om at bekæmpe skatteunddragelse.
This criterion bears no relationship, moreover, to France’s objective of combating tax avoidance.
Under alle omstændigheder kan et sådant socialt mål ikke i sig selv medføre, at den pågældende ordning ikke betegnes som støtte i henhold til traktatens artikel 87, stk. 1, idet denne artikel ikke skelner mellem årsager til eller mål for statslige indgreb, men definerer dem i forhold til deres virkninger.
At all events, such a social objective is not capable in itself of excluding the scheme at issue from classification as aid within the meaning of Article 87(1) of the Treaty inasmuch as that article does not distinguish between measures of state intervention by reference to their causes or their aims but defines them in relation to their effects.
Det er i øvrigt tidligere blevet fastslået, at traktatens artikel 87, stk. 1, ville være formålsløs, hvis fremme af formål vedrørende oprettelse eller fastholdelse af arbejdspladser kunne medføre, at specifikke foranstaltninger ikke skulle betegnes som statsstøtte, når statsstøtten i de fleste tilfælde er blevet ydet med henblik på at oprette eller fastholde arbejdspladser.
It has been ruled, furthermore, that Article 87(1) of the Treaty would be deprived of effectiveness if specific measures were to be excluded from classification as state aid for reasons to do with the creation or maintenance of employment, since it is with a view to creating or safeguarding jobs that most aid measures are granted.
I den forbindelse gør de franske myndigheder endvidere gældende, at skatteordningen i artikel 39 CA i skatteloven har gjort det muligt at forny og konsolidere handelsflåden.
The French authorities also claim that the tax scheme provided for in Article 39 CA of the General Tax Code has made possible a rejuvenation and consolidation of the commercial sea fleet.
På samme måde anfører Air France, at denne ordning fremmer fornyelsen af deres flåde, hvilket er blevet nødvendigt efter ændringen af miljøstandarderne.
Similarly, Air France states that the scheme promotes the renewal of its fleet, which has been made necessary by changes in environmental standards.