natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
De ændringer, som det kongelige lovdekret 10/2000 foretager, gør det muligt for landbrugskooperativerne at koncentrere de fleste af deres aktiviteter — hvis ikke alle — omkring distribution af diesel B, uden at de er underlagt den skattemæssige behandling, der gælder for ikke-kooperative selskaber.
The changes introduced by Royal Decree-Law No 10/2000 are of a nature to allow agricultural cooperatives to devote most or all of their business to the sale of B diesel without, however, being subject to the same tax treatment as non-cooperative forms of enterprise.
Domstolen fremhæver i sag T-146/03 [28], at før vedtagelsen af disse foranstaltninger var kooperativernes skattemæssige situation ikke relevant i forbindelse med distributionen af brændstoffer, da denne aktivitet skulle udføres af en særlig juridisk enhed, der ikke var omfattet af den fordelagtige skattemæssige status.
As the Court of First Instance states in Case T-146/03 [28], prior to the adoption of these measures, the tax status of cooperatives did not apply to the sale of fuel since this activity had to be carried out by a separate legal entity which would not have enjoyed this privileged tax status.
Domstolen mener således, at landbrugskooperativernes skattemæssige situation, hvad angår distribution af brændstof til ikke-medlemmer, er ændret af de omtvistede foranstaltninger.
The Court of First Instance therefore considers that the disputed measures have altered the tax situation of agricultural cooperatives with regard to the sale of fuel to non-member third parties.
Kommissionen konstaterer, at disse foranstaltninger, hvad angår distribution af brændstof til tredjeparter, begunstiger landbrugskooperativerne i forhold til selskaber, der ikke er kooperative, idet de tillader landbrugskooperativerne at handle ubegrænset med ikke-tilsluttede tredjeparter, uden at de mister en juridisk status, der er forskellig fra den, der gælder for ikke-kooperative selskaber og selv for kooperativer, der distribuerer diesel B uden at være landbrugskooperativer, og idet landbrugskooperativernes skattemæssige behandling ikke ændres.
Indeed, the Commission finds that through these measures, agricultural cooperatives – which are now entitled to trade with non-member third parties without volume restrictions whilst keeping their legal status, which is different to that of non-cooperative forms of enterprise and even non-agricultural cooperatives – engaged in the sale of B diesel, are placed in an advantageous situation compared to non-cooperative forms of enterprise in relation to the sale of fuel to non-member third parties, given that they are still entitled to their special tax treatment.
Det skal fremhæves, at hvad angår kooperativernes beskatningsgrundlag foretages der en skelnen mellem kooperative resultater (transaktioner med medlemmerne) og ikke-kooperative resultater (transaktioner foretaget med ikke-tilsluttede), og disse resultater beskattes ikke ens.
Indeed, it should be recalled that for the purposes of establishing the taxable amount for cooperatives, the results of cooperative activities (transactions with members) and the results of extra-cooperative activities (transactions with non-members) are assessed separately and are not taxed in the same manner.
Selv om regnskaberne er adskilte, er landbrugskooperativet en enkelt enhed og nyder skattefordele, der ikke er direkte forbundet med den nedsatte sats på resultaterne som fordelene i forbindelse med selskabsskat, tinglysnings- og stempelafgifter, skat på økonomisk aktivitet (størrelsen er fuldstændig uafhængig af et selskabs resultater) og skat på fast ejendom.
Nevertheless, in spite of the separation of accounts, as the agricultural cooperative remains a single entity it will continue to enjoy other tax advantages that are not directly related to the taxation of profits at a lower rate, such as advantages in respect of company tax, tax on capital transfers and documented legal acts, tax on economic activities (wherein the total amount is completely independent of the enterprise’s results) and tax on immovable property.
Kooperativerne nyder derfor stadig deres skatteprivilegier, når de øger omfanget af leveringen af diesel B til ikke-tilsluttede tredjeparter til over 50 % — hvorved der skabes en undtagelse i forhold til den nationale ret om kooperativer — uden at de skal oprette en enhed med status som juridisk person, for hvilken den almindelige skatteordning gælder.
Cooperatives therefore keep their special tax status even when they increase the volume of sales of B diesel to non-member third parties beyond 50 % without having to form a separate legal entity subject to the general tax system, thereby creating an exception to the national law on cooperatives.
Landbrugskooperativernes økonomiske situationer er derfor mere gunstig end alle andre skatteyderes, da en del [29] af de fordele, der især er knyttet til selskabsskatten, og alle fordele knyttet til de andre skatter opretholdes.
Agricultural cooperatives consequently find themselves in a more favourable financial situation than other taxpayers, since they are still entitled to some [29] of the advantages in respect of company tax in particular, and all of the advantages in respect of other taxes.
Hvad angår de argumenter, som forbundet af landbrugskooperativer i Spanien fremfører, især vedrørende selskabsskatten, minder Kommissionen om — som den også gjorde i beslutning nr. 2003/293/EF — at særligt beskyttede kooperativer ligesom alle landbrugskooperativer, er begunstiget med et fradrag i selskabsskatten på 50 %.
As regards the arguments advanced by Agri-food Cooperatives Spain in relation in this context specifically to company tax, the Commission recalls as it did in Commission Decision 2003/293/EC, that specially protected cooperatives, which include agricultural cooperatives, receive a 50 % rebate on company tax.
Der er desuden en nedsættelse på 50 % af bidragene til de obligatoriske reservefonde og en nedsættelse på 100 % af bidragene til fonden til uddannelse og støtte.
Moreover, there is a 50 % rebate on financing the mandatory reserves and a 100 % deduction on allocations to apprenticeship and training reserves.
Endelig kan de foretage en afskrivning af nye amortisable anlægsaktiver, som er købt inden for tre år fra datoen for deres optagelse i registret over kooperativer.
Finally, they are also completely free to decide on the depreciation of their new physical assets acquired during the three years following the date of their registration in the Register of Cooperatives.
Kommissionen erkender, at de skattemæssige fordele som kooperative selskaber nyder, skal undersøges i lyset af de skattemæssige forpligtelser, som de er underlagt til forskel fra ikke-kooperative selskaber.
However, the Commission admits that the tax advantages enjoyed by cooperatives should be examined in the light of the obligations that cooperatives, unlike non-cooperative forms of enterprise, must discharge.
I henhold til bemærkningerne fra forbundet af landbrugskooperativer i Spanien skal denne skattefordel ses i sammenhæng med den skat, kooperativmedlemmet skal betale af det kooperative overskud inden for rammerne af den personlige indkomstskat, der er forskellig fra udbyttet i et kapitalselskab.
According to Agri-food Cooperatives Spain, this tax advantage cannot be considered in isolation from the tax paid by cooperative members on their share of their cooperative’s profits when they pay their personal income tax, which is different from the dividends paid out by companies with share capital.
Den fordel, som kooperativet kunne nyde af den begunstigede selskabsskat, skulle derfor være udlignet af den dobbeltbeskatning, der er gældende for medlemmet af kooperativet, idet denne personligt skal betale indkomstskat og igennem kooperativet skal betale selskabsskat, hvorved skattebyrden øges.
The advantage that a cooperative might enjoy as a result of the tax advantage in respect of company tax is offset by the double taxation imposed by taxing the cooperative in respect of company tax and then cooperative members in respect of personal income tax and the increase in their tax burden in this way.
Domstolen bemærker dog, at dette argument skal forstås således, at det udelukkende omhandler fradraget på 50 % af selskabsskatten, dvs. en godtgørelse på 50 % af denne skat.
Now, as stated by the Court of First Instance in its judgment, this argument must be understood to refer exclusively to the offsetting of the 50 % reduction on company tax, that is, the 50 % rebate in respect of this tax.
Kommissionen bekræfter, at argumentet, der er fremført af forbundet af landbrugskooperativer i Spanien, omhandler denne foranstaltning.
Indeed, the Commission confirms that the argument put forward by Agri-food Cooperatives Spain addresses this measure.
Kommissionen vurderer, at fordelen skal undersøges med hensyn til kooperativet og ikke med hensyn til dets medlemmer, da emnet for denne analyse er kooperativet.
The Commission considers that the advantage must be examined at the cooperative level and not at that of its members as the cooperative is actually the subject of interest for the purposes of this analysis.
Som følge heraf kan de tal, som forbundet af kooperativer i Spanien er fremkommet med vedrørende selskabsskatten, ikke anses som fyldestgørende.
Consequently, the figures put forward by Agri-food Cooperatives Spain in relation to the corporate tax rate are not meaningful.
De omhandler desuden kun nettorådigheden over de midler, som kooperativmedlemmet modtager efter skat.
Moreover, they only relate to the net availability of funds received by the cooperative member following taxation.
Kommissionen mener for eksempel, at kooperativets økonomiske situation ikke nødvendigvis svækkes af, at der afsættes midler til de obligatoriske fonde, da midlerne bevares og anvendes af kooperativet i visse nøje afgrænsede tilfælde.
Consequently, the Commission considers, for example, that the economic situation of the cooperative is not necessarily weakened by the allocation of capital to the mandatory reserves, since these are kept and used by the latter in very specific situations.
På baggrund af de forklaringer, der er givet, mener Kommissionen, at landbrugskooperativernes skattemæssige situation i Spanien, hvad angår selskabsskatten, på flere områder er fordelagtig.
The Commission considers, in the light of the explanations provided, that the taxation of agricultural cooperatives in Spain through company tax certainly does hold some advantages.
Den differentierede skattemæssige behandling vedrørende denne skat kan kun rationelt begrundes med visse restriktive forhold forbundet med kooperative aktiviteter såsom dobbeltbeskatningen.
Furthermore, the different treatment in respect of the aforementioned tax cannot be explained by certain constraints specific to cooperative business, such as double taxation.
Når et kooperativ foretager transaktioner med ikke-tilsluttede tredjeparter, handler det på markedet som enhver anden virksomhed, og derfor er der ingen begrundelse for at behandle det anderledes end andre virksomheder.
Indeed, when a cooperative engages in transactions with non-member third parties, it operates in the market in the same manner as any business and there is no justification for it to be treated differently to other companies.
Som følge heraf bør kooperativernes indtægter fra transaktioner med ikke-tilsluttede tredjeparter beskattes på kooperativt niveau, på samme måde som hvis transaktionerne var foretaget af et kapitalistisk selskab, og de beløb, der udloddes til medlemmerne, bør beskattes på samme måde som det udbytte, der modtages af aktionærerne i et kapitalistisk selskab.
In the first place, cooperative revenue from transactions with non-member third parties must be taxed at cooperative level in the same way as if the activity was carried out by a company with share capital and the amounts distributed to its members should be taxed in the same way as dividends received by the shareholders of a company with share capital.
Endelig konstaterer Kommissionen, at der ikke er fremført argumenter vedrørende muligheden for afskrivning af nye amortisable anlægsaktiver, som er købt inden for tre år fra datoen for deres optagelse i registret over kooperativer.
Finally, the Commission states that no argument has been advanced as regards the fact that cooperatives are free to decide on the depreciation of their new physical assets acquired during the three years following the date of their registration in the Register of Cooperatives or as regards other advantages related to company tax.
Kommissionen minder desuden om, at fordelen ikke kun vedrører selskabsskatten, men også de andre skatter beskrevet i betragtning 20 i denne afgørelse (tinglysnings- og stempelafgifter, skat på økonomisk virksomhed og skat på fast ejendom).
The Commission also recalls that cooperatives not only enjoy an advantage in relation to company tax but also other taxes as described in recital 20 (tax on capital transfers and documented legal acts, tax on economic activities and tax on immovable property) of this Decision.
Der kan ikke for disse skatter være tale om en udligning gennem dobbeltbeskatning.
There is no question of any kind of offsetting for double taxation in relation to these taxes.
Ifølge Spanien er de foranstaltninger, der er indført ved kongeligt lovdekret nr. 10/2000, ikke statsstøtte, da de ikke indvirker på konkurrencen mellem virksomheder, der udøver samme aktivitet, fordi alle virksomheder i sektoren, herunder landbrugskooperativer, er underlagt samme beskatning gennem selskabsskatten (35 %).
Spain concludes that the measures introduced by Royal Decree-Law No 10/2000 are not State aid inasmuch as they do not affect competing businesses in the same sector, since all firms, including agricultural cooperatives, engaging in this activity are subject to the same rate of company tax (35 %).
Som nævnt giver de ændringer, som lovdekret nr. 10/2000 indfører, dog landbrugskooperativerne mulighed for at koncentrere de fleste af deres aktiviteter — hvis ikke alle — omkring distribution af diesel B, uden at de er underlagt den skattemæssige behandling, der gælder for ikke-kooperative selskaber, da de beholder den gunstigere skatteordning, der er knyttet til selskabsskat, tinglysnings- og stempelafgifter, skat på økonomisk aktivitet (størrelsen er fuldstændig uafhængig af et selskabs resultater) og skatten på fast ejendom.
However, as mentioned above, the changes introduced by Royal Decree-Law No 10/2000 are of a nature to allow agricultural cooperatives to devote most or all of their business to the sale of B diesel without, however, being subject to the same tax treatment as non-cooperative forms of enterprise as they do not lose their preferential tax treatment in relation to the other advantages in respect of company tax, tax on capital transfers and documented legal acts, tax on economic activities (where the total amount is completely independent of the enterprise’s results) and tax on immovable property.
Kommissionen mener derfor, at for så vidt angår de foranstaltninger, der er indført ved artikel 1 i det kongelige lovdekret 10/2000, er kriteriet »fordel« opfyldt.
As a result, with regard to measures adopted by virtue of Article 1 of Royal Decree-Law No 10/2000, the Commission considers that the ‘advantage’ criterion is fulfilled.
Kriteriet »selektivitet«
The ‘selectivity’ criterion
For at en foranstaltning kan betragtes som statsstøtte i henhold til artikel 107, stk. 1 i EUF-traktaten skal den give en selektiv fordel til visse virksomheder eller visse sektorer.
In order to constitute State aid within the meaning of Article 107(1) of the TFEU, a measure must, inter alia, be of a nature to confer a selective advantage for the exclusive benefit of certain undertakings or certain business sectors.
Denne artikel sigter mod støtte, der fordrejer eller truer med at fordreje konkurrencevilkårene ved at »begunstige bestemte virksomheder eller produktionen af bestemte varer« [30].
Effectively, this Article refers to aid which distorts or threatens to distort competition ‘by favouring certain undertakings or the production of certain goods’ [30].
Når Kommissionen kontrollerer, om en foranstaltning er selektiv, undersøger den, hvorvidt den differentierede behandling af virksomhederne med hensyn til fordele og ulemper, som den pågældende foranstaltning indfører, er begrundet i det almindelige systems karakter eller forvaltning.
In ascertaining the selective nature of a measure, the Commission must examine whether the differentiation between enterprises introduced by the measure under consideration falls within the nature or scheme of the general system in terms of advantages or obligations.
Ifølge retspraksis er en specifik foranstaltning, der kan begrundes med skattesystemets interne logik, ikke omfattet af artikel 107, stk. 1, i EUF-traktaten [31].
Indeed, according to existing case law, a specific tax measure which is justified by the internal organisation of the tax system is excluded from the application of Article 107(1) of the TFEU [31].
Hvis denne differentiering baserer sig på andre målsætninger end det almindelige systems målsætninger, er det i princippet den gældende betragtning, at den pågældende foranstaltning opfylder selektivitetskriteriet i artikel 107, stk. 1, i EUF-traktaten.
If this differentiation is to achieve aims that are different to those pursued by the general system, the measure in question is, in principle, considered to fulfil the criterion of selectivity provided for in Article 107(1) of the TFEU.
Hvad angår de differentierede skatteforanstaltninger, fremhæver Kommissionens meddelelse om anvendelsen af statsstøttereglerne på foranstaltninger vedrørende direkte beskatning af virksomhederne i artikel 20, at visse skattefordele undertiden er begrænset til visse virksomhedstyper, til visse virksomhedsfunktioner eller til visse produktionsformer.
As regards differentiated tax measures, point 20 of the communication from the Commission on the application of State aid rules to measures relating to direct business taxation recalls that some tax benefits are on occasion restricted to certain types of undertaking, to some of their functions or to the production of certain goods.
Når en fordel begunstiger visse virksomheder eller visse produktioner, vil den kunne udgøre statsstøtte efter artikel 107, stk. 1, i EUF-traktaten.
In so far as they favour certain undertakings or the production of certain goods, they may constitute State aid as referred to in Article 107(1) of the TFEU.
Begunstiger foranstaltningerne visse virksomheder eller visse produktioner?
Do the measures favour certain undertakings or the production of certain goods?
Det skal undersøges, hvorvidt den pågældende foranstaltning inden for rammerne af den spanske lovgivning begunstiger visse virksomheder eller visse produktioner frem for andre, der med hensyn til lovgivningens målsætninger befinder sig i en sammenlignelig faktisk og retlig situation [32].
It is advisable to determine whether, within the framework of the Spanish legal system, the measure in question is of a nature to favour certain undertakings or the production of certain goods in relation to others in a comparable factual or legal situation in the eyes of the aforementioned system [32].
Kommissionens meddelelse om fremme af andelsselskaber i Europa fremhæver, at andelsselskaberne drives ud fra deres medlemmers interesser, idet disse samtidig er brugere; de drives ikke ud fra hensynet til eksterne investorers interesser.
The communication from the Commission on the promotion of cooperative societies in Europe recognises that cooperatives act in the interests of their members, who are also its users, and that they are not managed for the profit of external investors.
Medlemmerne modtager afkast i forhold til deres forretninger med andelsselskabet, mens reserver og aktiver ejes i fællesskab, ikke kan fordeles og skal anvendes i medlemmernes fælles interesse.
The profits are earned by members in proportion to their transactions with the cooperative, while the reserves and the assets are jointly held, unapportionable and given over to the common interests of the members.
Da de personlige relationer mellem medlemmerne i princippet er stærke og har stor betydning, skal nye medlemmer godkendes, idet stemmeretten dog ikke nødvendigvis er proportional med kapitalandelen.
As there are generally close personal relationships between members, new members must be approved by them, whilst voting rights are not necessarily proportional to shares held.
Hvis et medlem melder sig ud, har han ret til at få sin andel tilbagebetalt, hvilket indebærer en reduktion af kapitalen.
On resigning, a member is entitled to be reimbursed for their share, resulting in a reduction in capital.
Ud fra dette er det muligt at definere et »rent gensidigt kooperativ«, hvilket kan anvendes til at vurdere, hvorvidt kooperativerne er i den samme faktiske og retlige situation som kapitalselskaber med hensyn til det spanske skattesystem.
This calls for a definition of the ‘true mutual cooperative model’, which can be used to evaluate whether cooperatives are in the same factual and legal situation in the eyes of the Spanish tax system as companies with share capital.
Først og fremmest kan det fremhæves, at i et rent gensidigt kooperativ er forholdet til medlemmerne af særlig karakter.
Firstly, the true mutual cooperative is characterised by a specific relationship with its members.
Hvert medlem er en partner med stemmeret. Hvert medlem har én enkelt stemme, beslutningerne tages med flertal, og en valgt bestyrelse er ansvarlig over for medlemmerne.
Each member is a partner with a say in the administration of the cooperative whereby each member has one vote only, decisions are made by majority vote and the elected management is responsible to its members.
Der er talrige forbindelser mellem kooperativet og dets medlemmer, og de er ikke alle af økonomisk karakter.
There are numerous interactions between the cooperative and its members which go beyond mere commercial dealings.
I et rent gensidigt kooperativ er det desuden et krav, at de økonomiske resultater fordeles ligeligt, og at alt overskud skal tilgå medlemmerne.
Next, in a true mutual cooperative, the results of economic performance must be equitably and fairly distributed and any surplus must eventually be returned to its members.
Dette svarer til gensidighedsprincippet, som sikrer, at kooperativerne handler i medlemmernes interesse.
This is in line with the principle of mutuality, by which cooperatives act in the interest of their members.
Medlemmerne af et andelsgrovvareselskab eller en brugsforening modtager ved regnskabsårets afslutning økonomiske fordele, der er baseret på den totale værdi af transaktionerne med kooperativet (individuelle overskud eller rabatter).
The members of a retail or consumers’ cooperative receive financial benefits based on the total value of their transactions with the cooperative (individual dividends or profits) at the end of the financial year.
De kan dog beslutte, at kooperativet beholder en del af disse rabatter eller overskud for at henlægge dem i forskellige reserver.
They may however decide to allow the cooperative to keep some of these dividends or surpluses for the different reserves.
Et rent gensidigt kooperativ kan defineres således, at det udelukkende handler med sine medlemmer.
Pure mutual cooperatives may thus be defined as trading solely with their members.
Med hensyn til især selskabsskat har rent gensidige kooperativer intet overskud, for de handler kun i medlemmernes interesse.
As a result, as regards company tax in particular, in true mutual cooperatives the cooperative does not make any profit because it only operates for the benefit of its members.
Derfor mener Kommissionen, at rent gensidige kooperativer og selskaber, der tilstræber profit, ikke er i den samme faktiske og retlige situation hvad angår beskatning af overskud.
For this reason, the Commission considers that true mutual cooperatives and corporations for profit are not in comparable legal and factual situations with regard to the taxation of profits.