natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
I en sådan situation udgør kooperativernes fradrag i den skattepligtige selskabsindkomst ikke en statsstøtte.
Given this situation, the deduction of the taxable income of true mutual cooperatives does not therefore constitute State aid.
Kommissionen erkender dog, at det kongelige lovdekret 10/2000 indfører faktorer, der ændrer situationen for rent gensidige kooperativer navnlig ved den mulige ophævelse af maksimumsgrænsen på 50 % af omsætningen ved landbrugskooperativers transaktioner med ikke-tilsluttede tredjeparter for levering af dieselolie B til ikke-tilsluttede tredjeparter, uden at kooperativerne derved fratages deres status som skattemæssigt beskyttede kooperativer.
Be that as it may, the Commission also recognises that Royal Decree-Law No 10/2000 introduces factors which alter the true cooperative model, particularly the possibility of waiving the maximum limit of 50 % imposed on agricultural cooperatives in their B diesel transactions with non-member third parties without losing their status as protected cooperatives; in other words, the principle of exclusivism in favour of agricultural cooperatives is called into question.
At kooperativerne kan overskride grænsen på 50 % er nok til, at kooperativernes karakter af »rent gensidige kooperativer« ikke er dækkende, da en stor del af omsætningen kan realiseres med personer eller enheder, der ikke er medlemmer af kooperativet.
Indeed, the mere fact that the cooperatives can exceed the 50 % limit taints their ‘true mutual’ nature and, what is more, a large proportion of this business may be concluded with non-members.
Et landbrugskooperativs aktiviteter kan ligeledes ændre karakter, så kooperativet begynder at stræbe efter profit, og man kan stille spørgsmålet, i hvor høj grad de principper, der karakteriserer rent gensidige kooperativer (medlemmernes aktive deltagelse i styringen, beslutningstagningen, forvaltningen af kooperativet, ekslusivitets-, altruisme- og demokratiprincipperne), kan opretholdes, hvis kooperativets tjenesteydelser uden begrænsninger er åbne for ikke-medlemmer.
The activity of the agricultural cooperative may also be altered profoundly by pursuing a profit-seeking objective and it is appropriate to ask whether the principles that characterise a true mutual cooperative (such as the active participation of cooperative members in the administration, decision-making or even management of the cooperative, the principles of exclusivism, altruism and democracy) can be upheld whilst the cooperative’s services are made available to non-members on an unlimited basis.
Desuden kan man ikke se bort fra, at ændringen af karakteren for indtægterne fra transaktioner med ikke-tilsluttede tredjeparter fjerner kooperativer fra deres karakter af kooperativ.
In addition, it cannot be ignored that the change in the nature of the revenues from transactions concluded with non-member third parties marks a departure from the nature of cooperativism.
I dette tilfælde må det siges, at det kongelige lovdekret 10/2000 undergraver landbrugskooperativernes karakter af ren gensidighed.
Thus, it seems that the true mutual nature of cooperatives in the agricultural sector concerned by the measure is definitely called into question by Royal Decree-Law No 10/2000 in this case.
Af disse grunde og set i lyset af gældende spansk lovgivning kan Kommissionen ikke med sikkerhed konstatere, at de spanske landbrugskooperativer, der er tale om, er rent gensidige.
For these reasons, and in the light of existing Spanish legislation, the Commission is unable unequivocally to confirm the true mutual nature of the Spanish agricultural cooperatives concerned.
Disse landbrugskooperativer og deres indtægter skal derfor i en analyse ikke sammenlignes med rent gensidige kooperativer, men med kapitalselskaber.
It would therefore seem that agricultural cooperatives and their revenue should be compared not to true mutual cooperative societies but indeed to companies with share capital.
De lovgivningsmæssige rammer, på grundlag af hvilke foranstaltningerne skal vurderes, skal dog bestemmes.
It is however necessary to determine the legal system within which the measures must be evaluated, that is to say the reference framework.
I denne henseende skal det bemærkes, at de pågældende foranstaltninger, der giver skattefordele til landbrugskooperativer, er særlige undtagelser, der er fastsat ved lov nr. 20/1990 om skatteordningen for kooperativer.
In this respect, it should be noted that as regards the tax advantages conferred on Spanish agricultural cooperatives, the measures in question constitute special exemptions provided for by Law No 20/1990 on the tax arrangements applying to cooperatives.
Loven fastsætter i artikel 16.5, 18.2, 33.1, 33.2, 33.4, 34.1 og 34.2 en række foranstaltninger, der begunstiger særligt beskyttede kooperativer, hvilket omfatter landbrugskooperativer, med hensyn til selskabsskat, tinglysnings- og stempelafgifter, skat på økonomisk virksomhed og skat på fast ejendom (for nærmere oplysninger henvises til betragtning 20 ovenfor).
Articles 16(5), 18(2), 33(1), 33(2), 33(3), 33(4), 34(1) and 34(2) of the Law provide for a whole series of favourable measures for specially protected cooperatives, including agricultural cooperatives, in respect of company tax, tax on capital transfers and documented legal acts, tax on economic activities and tax on immovable property (see recital 20 above for details of these advantages).
Det er endvidere hensigtsmæssigt at bestemme målsætningen for hver af disse fire skatter og afgifter.
Next, it is important to determine the objective of each of these four taxes.
Det skal i denne henseende bemærkes, at målet med selskabsskatten er at beskatte virksomhedernes overskud.
To this end, it should be observed that the objective of company tax is the taxation of the profits of businesses.
Målet for de andre skatter og afgifter er henholdsvis beskatning af overdragelse af formue og fast ejendom, afgifter i forbindelse med tinglysning af overdragelse af formue og fast ejendom, beskatning af økonomiske aktiviteter og beskatning af fast ejendom.
The objective of each of the remaining taxes is the taxation of capital transfers and of the execution of documented legal acts, the taxation of the exercise of an economic activity and the taxation of the possession of a right on immovable property.
Endelig er det nødvendigt at fastlægge, hvorvidt kooperativerne og kapitalselskaberne er i den samme faktiske og retlige situation med hensyn til målene for disse fire skatter og afgifter.
Finally, as mentioned above, it is necessary to determine whether cooperatives and companies with share capital find themselves in comparable factual and legal situations as regards these objectives and these four types of taxation.
Hvad angår selskabsskatten, kan Kommissionen, da den ikke kan konstatere de pågældende spanske landbrugskooperativers rent gensidige karakter, der per definition ikke har overskud, heller ikke udelukke, at kooperativerne og kapitalselskaberne befinder sig i en sammenlignelig faktisk og retlig situation hvad angår fordele knyttet til denne skat.
First of all, as far as company tax is concerned, since the Commission is unable to confirm the mutual nature of the Spanish agricultural cooperatives in question, which by definition would not make a profit, it is consequently also unable to exclude that cooperatives and companies with share capital find themselves in comparable factual and legal situations regarding advantages related to the tax.
Når et kooperativt foretager transaktioner med ikke-tilsluttede tredjeparter, handler det på markedet som enhver anden virksomhed, og det er derfor i en faktisk og retlig sammenlignelig situation hvad angår målet for selskabsskatten.
When a cooperative engages in transactions with non-member third parties, it operates in the market in the same manner as any other business and, consequently, finds itself in a comparable factual and legal situation as far as the objective of company tax is concerned.
Hvad angår de skatteforanstaltninger, der omhandler kooperativernes udelelige reserver, mener Kommissionen at, med hensyn til selskabsskatten kan disse reserver sammenlignes med kapitalselskabernes reserver.
In addition, as regards tax measures in respect of the undistributable reserves of cooperatives, the Commission considers that these can be compared to the reserves of companies with share capital for the purposes of company tax.
At en del af kooperativernes overskud afsættes til udelelige reserver, kan sammenlignes med, at kapitalselskaber beholder deres overskud, da de udelelige reserver anvendes i forbindelse med kooperativets aktiviteter på samme måde som det overskud, som kapitalselskaber har afsat til reserver.
Indeed, for the cooperative, the allocation of profits to the undistributable reserves would in essence be comparable to companies with share capital keeping their profits, because the undistributable reserves are used in the course of cooperative activities in a similar manner to the profits reserved by companies with share capital.
Sammenligningen skal foretages ud fra virksomhedens synspunkt og ikke ud fra hverken aktionærernes eller kooperativets medlemmers synspunkt.
The comparison must concern the business rather than cooperative members or shareholders.
Selv det forhold, at det er obligatorisk for kooperativerne at henlægge en vis del til de udelelige reserver, ændrer ikke ved foranstaltningens karakter, da kapitalselskaber også er forpligtede til at oprette reserver, der dog beskattes.
Even the mandatory nature of the cooperative’s undistributable reserves cannot change the fact that the measure constitutes aid, since companies with share capital also have mandatory legal reserves which are in contrast subject to taxation.
Kommissionen mener derfor, at de udelelige reserver økonomisk kan sammenlignes med enhver anden reserve, der er fastsat for andre virksomheder.
Thus, the Commission is of the opinion that the undistributable reserves are economically comparable to any other reserve of any other business.
Enhver foranstaltning vedrørende selskabsbeskatningen, der opretter en differentieret behandling og begunstiger kooperativerne både generelt og specifikt med hensyn til udelelige reserver, kan give disse kooperativer en fordel frem for kapitalselskaber, der ikke kan nyde disse fordele, selv om de befinder sig i en sammenlignelig situation.
As a result, any measure in relation to company tax which aims to introduce differentiated and more advantageous treatment of profits in general and of profits destined for undistributable reserves in particular is likely to provide cooperatives with an economic advantage over companies with share capital which would not be able to qualify for them even if their situation were comparable.
Kommissionen er af den opfattelse, at hvad angår fordelene i forbindelse med selskabsbeskatningen fremgår det af disse betragtninger, at kapitalselskaber er sidestillet med kooperativer, og derfor kan det hævdes, at kooperativerne er begunstigede i forhold til kapitalselskaberne.
The Commission is of the opinion that these considerations suggest that companies with share capital are on the same plane as cooperative societies and that, consequently, it is possible to state that cooperative societies enjoy an advantage as regards company tax over companies with share capital.
Hvad angår tinglysnings- og stempelafgifter, skal det fremhæves, at disse indirekte skatter er pålagt retlige dokumenter i forbindelse med afgiftspligtige formueoverdragelser, tinglysninger og visse selskabsmæssige beslutninger (som kapitaludvidelser).
In relation to tax on capital transfers and documented legal acts, it should be recalled that this indirect form of taxation is designed to be charged on different legal acts such as taxable capital transfers, documented legal acts or even certain company transactions (i.e., corporate financing such as increasing share capital, for example).
Et kapitalselskab, der foretager disse overdragelser og beslutninger, beskattes.
A company with share capital would be taxed on the execution of these acts.
Som nævnt under betragtning 20 i denne afgørelse er kooperativer undtaget fra disse beskatninger (stiftelsesdokumenter, kapitaludvidelse, optagelse og afvikling af lån osv. [33].
Whereas, as explained in recital 20 of this Decision, cooperative societies enjoy a tax exemption on the same acts (incorporation, capital increase, taking out and cancelling loans, and so on [33]).
Kooperative selskaber nyder derfor en fordel i forhold til andre kapitalselskaber.
Therefore, cooperative societies enjoy an advantage over companies with share capital.
Skatten på økonomisk virksomhed er direkte pålagt enhver type virksomhedsmæssig, professionel eller kunstnerisk økonomisk aktivitet, som fysiske eller juridiske personer foretager på det spanske område [34].
Next, the tax on economic activities is charged directly on any type of entrepreneurial, professional or artistic economic activity performed by natural or legal persons on Spanish territory [34].
Et kapitalselskab, der har en omsætning på over en (1) million EUR, skal betale denne skat afhængig af den økonomiske aktivitet.
A company with share capital with a turnover in excess of one (1) million euro is subject to this tax depending on the economic activity that it is engaged in.
Som nævnt under betragtning 20 i denne afgørelse, nyder kooperative selskaber en godtgørelse på 95 % af denne skat [35].
As mentioned in recital 20 of this Decision, cooperative societies enjoy a 95 % rebate on this tax [35].
Kooperativer nyder derfor en fordel frem for de ovennævnte kapitalselskaber, der er pålagt denne skat fuldt ud.
Therefore, cooperative societies enjoy an advantage over the aforementioned companies with share capital, which are taxed at the full rate.
Skatten på fast ejendom er en lokal skat, der er pålagt rettigheder knyttet til ejerskab af en ejendom og andre reelle tinglige rettigheder knyttet til en ejendom.
Lastly, it should be recalled as regards tax on immovable property that this is a local tax charged on the rights of ownership and other property rights attached to a building.
Som beskrevet under betragtning 20 i denne afgørelse er kapitalselskaber pålagt denne skat fuldt ud, hvilket ikke er tilfældet for kooperativer.
Companies with share capital are taxed at the full rate, unlike cooperative societies, as described in recital 20 of this Decision.
For disse er der fastsat en godtgørelse på 95 % af denne skat, når den vedrører landejendomme, som besiddes af landbrugskooperativerne og kooperativerne til fælles udnyttelse af jord [36].
Indeed, the latter enjoy a 95 % rebate on this local tax in respect of rural property belonging to agricultural cooperatives and community land cooperatives [36].
Kooperativer nyder derfor i ikke-bymæssige områder en fordel frem for de ovennævnte kapitalselskaber, der er pålagt denne skat fuldt ud.
Therefore, cooperative societies in non-urban areas enjoy an advantage over companies with share capital, which are subject to the full rate of this tax.
Kommissionen kan således konstatere, at kapitalselskaber er sidestillet med kooperativer og befinder sig i en sammenlignelig situation, og derfor kan det bekræftes, at de er udelukket fra disse fordele [37], og at fordelene er selektive, da de kun gælder for kooperativer.
Having found that companies with share capital definitely are on the same plane and find themselves in a similar situation to that of cooperative societies, the Commission is in a position to ascertain that they are excluded from enjoying the aforementioned advantages [37] and that as a result these advantages are indeed selective since they only apply to cooperative societies.
Kommissionen konstaterer derfor, at de foranstaltninger, der udføres ved artikel 1 i det kongelige lovdekret 10/2000, giver en selektiv fordel [38] til landbrugskooperativer.
Therefore, the Commission finds that the measures introduced by Article 1 of Royal Decree-Law No 10/2000 do confer a selective advantage [38] on agricultural cooperatives.
Kan foranstaltningerne begrundes i systemets karakter eller forvaltning?
Are the measures justified by the nature or scheme of the system?
Det skal herefter undersøges, om de omtvistede skatteforanstaltninger kan begrundes i skattesystemets karakter eller forvaltning, hvilket skal påvises af den berørte medlemsstat.
Next, it should be determined whether the tax measures in question can be justified by the nature or scheme of the tax system, which the Member State concerned has a duty to prove.
En foranstaltning, der skaber en undtagelse i anvendelsen af det almindelige skattesystem, kan begrundes i skattesystemets karakter eller forvaltning, hvis den pågældende medlemsstat kan påvise, at foranstaltningen er direkte affødt af grundprincipperne eller hovedlinjerne i den pågældende medlemsstats skattesystem [39].
A measure introducing an exception to the application of the general tax system may be justified by the general scheme and nature of the tax system if the Member State concerned can prove that this measure results directly from the founding principles or policy of its tax system [39].
Begrundes foranstaltningen i skattesystemets karakter eller forvaltning, er der tale om en undtagelse fra forbuddet mod statsstøtte, og en sådan begrundelse skal derfor fortolkes restriktivt [40].
A justification based on the nature or scheme of the tax system at issue constitutes an exception to the principle that State aid is prohibited and must therefore be interpreted strictly [40].
Medlemsstaten skal påvise, at den pågældende undtagelse kan begrundes i systemets karakter eller forvaltning, og at den altså ikke udgør statsstøtte i henhold til EUF-traktatens artikel 107.
It is the duty of the Member State to prove that the exception in question is justified by the nature and scheme of the system and therefore that it does not constitute aid within the meaning of Article 107 of the TFEU.
På denne baggrund skal der skelnes mellem de mål, der er fastsat for et bestemt skattesystem, som er eksterne faktorer, og de interne mekanismer i skattesystemet, der er nødvendige, for at målene kan nås [41].
To this end, a distinction should be drawn between the objectives assigned to a particular tax system and which are external to it, on the one hand, and the mechanisms inherent to the tax system itself which are necessary for the achievement of such objectives, on the other [41].
I denne sag vurderer forbundet af landbrugskooperativer i Spanien, at målet med de foranstaltninger, der er fastsat ved det kongelige lovdekret 10/2000, navnlig vedrørende virkningerne på selskabsskatten, er at udligne den dobbeltbeskatning af overskuddet, der er pålagt gennem selskabsskatten og indkomstbeskatningen.
In the case in question, Agri-food Cooperatives Spain considers that the measures provided for in Royal Decree-Law No 10/2000, particularly in relation to the impact on company tax, are intended to offset the double taxation of cooperative income through company tax and personal income tax.
På baggrund af de fremførte argumenter er Kommissionen ikke i stand til at udtale sig om, hvorvidt disse påstande er korrekte.
The Commission is unable to make a decision as to the accuracy of this assertion on the basis of the arguments put forward.
Kommissionen konstaterer dog, at dette argument ikke fremføres af Spanien for at påvise, at foranstaltningen er direkte affødt af grundprincipperne eller hovedlinjerne i Spaniens skattesystem.
Nevertheless, it recognises that this assertion is not made by the Spanish authorities in order to prove that the measure results directly from the founding principles or the policy of its tax system.
Spanien mener, at formålet er, at kooperativer kan udøve denne aktivitet, uden at det er nødvendigt, at de opretter en anden separat enhed, fordi selskabsbeskatningen bliver ens i de to situationer, eftersom resultaterne fra levering af dieselolie B til tredjeparter er underlagt den almindelige ordning for selskabsskat.
Spain holds that the aim is to allow cooperatives to carry out this activity without having to set up a separate legal entity, since the same company tax is payable in both situations in so far as the revenue from sales of B diesel to third parties is subject to the general company tax regime.
Målet med de to foranstaltninger er at gøre det muligt for landbrugs- og opdrætsbedrifter at klare sig i fremtiden og at opretholde den nødvendige konkurrenceevne i en situation, der er præget af økonomiske problemer pga. urimelige prisstigninger på dieselolie og euroens faldende kurs over for dollaren [42].
The objective of the two measures is to allow farms to continue their business activities and to maintain their competitiveness so that they can cope with the difficult economic conditions created by the exorbitant increase in fuel prices and the depreciation of the euro against the dollar [42].
Hvad angår de andre skatter, er Spanien af den opfattelse, at skattefordelene ligger forud for kongeligt lovdekret nr. 10/2000, og det kan ikke siges, at kooperativerne nyder fordele som følge af nævnte dekrets ikrafttræden.
Concerning the other taxes, the Spanish authorities consider that the tax advantages predate Royal Decree-Law No 10/2000, so that cooperatives are not entitled to them as a result of the aforementioned Decree-Law.
Kommissionen mener dog, at det forhold, at de skattefordele, der er knyttet til forskellige skatter, og som er skabt af de to pågældende foranstaltninger, er udformet således, at de sikrer en udligning af en økonomisk situation, ikke i sig selv retfærdiggør, at alle de omtvistede fordele, som de spanske myndigheder giver, kan begrundes med skattesystemets karakter eller forvaltning [43].
However, the Commission considers that the mere fact that the tax advantages brought to bear on the various taxes by the two measures in question were designed to offset difficult economic conditions does not allow it to consider that all the disputed tax advantages granted by the Spanish authorities are justified by the nature and scheme of the national tax system [43].
Kommissionen mener derfor, at med hensyn til de foranstaltninger, der er indført ved artikel 1 i det kongelige lovdekret 10/2000, er kriteriet »selektivitet« opfyldt.
As a result, with regard to the measures provided for in Article 1 of Royal Decree-Law No 10/2000, the Commission considers that the ‘selectivity’ criterion is fulfilled.
Konklusioner om hvorvidt der er tale om støtte som omhandlet i artikel 107, stk. 1, i EUF-traktaten
Conclusions on the nature of ‘aid’ within the meaning of Article 107(1) of the TFEU
På baggrund af ovenstående finder Kommissionen, at foranstaltningerne til fordel for landbrugskooperativer, som er fastsat ved artikel 1 i det kongelige lovdekret nr. 10/2000, der blev vedtaget som følge af prisstigninger på brændstof, udgør en fordel til landbrugskooperativer, som andre virksomheder ikke nyder, og som fordrejer eller truer med at fordreje konkurrencen ved at begunstige visse virksomheder og visse produktioner, for så vidt den kan påvirke samhandelen mellem medlemsstaterne.
The Commission considers, in light of the above explanations, that the measures in favour of agricultural cooperatives referred to in Article 1 of Royal Decree-Law No 10/2000 adopted following the increase in fuel prices confer an advantage on them to which other operators are not entitled, which distorts or threatens to distort competition by favouring certain undertakings or the production of certain goods, and that it is therefore likely to affect trade between Member States.
Derfor konkluderer Kommissionen, at disse foranstaltninger henhører under anvendelsesområdet for artikel 107, stk. 1, i EUF-traktaten.
Consequently, the Commission concludes that these measures fall within the scope of Article 107(1) of the TFEU.