natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
For så vidt angår SIC's påstande om, at BDO Binder-rapporten for 1998 havde medtaget materielle aktiver for ca. 53 mio. EUR, selv om der ikke eksisterede nogen opgørelse over disse aktiver, har Portugal bekræftet, at der er foretaget investeringer i forhold til disse aktiver.
As regards SIC’s allegations that the BDO Binder report for the year 1998 included some EUR 53 million of tangible assets, although no inventory existed for such assets, Portugal has confirmed that the respective investments have been made for those assets.
At der ikke oprindeligt var blevet udarbejdet en opgørelse over disse aktiver (selv om der senere, med undtagelse af 4 mio. EUR, kunne redegøres for værdien af disse aktiver, og der kunne udarbejdes en opgørelse med tilbagevirkende kraft), er ikke ensbetydende med, at der ikke var foretaget nogen investeringer.
The fact that no inventory was originally drawn up for those assets (although except for 4 million the value of such assets could later be identified and inventory could retroactively be drawn up), does not mean that no investment had been made.
Den eksterne revisor bekræftede saldi og tal, samt transaktioner i forhold til tredjepart.
The external auditor confirmed balances and figures and transaction with third parties.
For så vidt angår SIC's påstand om, at reklametiderne ifølge BDO Binder-rapporten for 1998 var blevet overskredet, fremhævede Portugal, at dette på ingen måde ville medføre en reduceret økonomisk kompensation.
As regards SIC’s allegation that according to the BDO Binder report for the year 1998 advertising times limits had been exceeded, Portugal pointed out that this would in no way involve a reduction in the financial compensation.
Årsagen hertil er, at de beløb, som RTP modtog i forbindelse med overskridelserne af reklametiderne, lå langt under underfinansieringen for det pågældende år.
The reason for that is that the amounts, which RTP received from the excess of advertising times was way below the under-financing of that year.
Under alle omstændigheder bekræfter Portugal, at de samlede reklameindtægter (herunder indtægter i forbindelse med overskridelsen af reklametiderne) blev taget med i betragtning ved beregningen af finansieringsbehovet, dvs. kompensationen for opfyldelsen af public service-forpligtelsen.
In any event, Portugal confirmed that the total advertising revenues (including revenues from the excess of advertising limits) were taken into account when calculating the financing need, i.e. the compensation for the fulfilment of the public service obligation.
Portugal gør gældende, at rapport 8/2002 fra den portugisiske revisionsdomstol ikke skal indgå i denne afgørelse, da dommen afsagt af Retten i Første Instans i sag T-442/03 kun fandt en objektiv svaghed i de oplysninger, der er indeholdt i public service-rapporterne, som ikke var fulgt op af en ekstern revision.
Portugal claims that the 8/2002 report of the Portuguese Court of Auditors should not be taken into account in this Decision as the judgment of the Court in Case T-442/2003 only found an objective weakness of the information contained in the public service reports, which were not accompanied by an external audit.
Portugal lægger vægt på, at revisionsdomstolens rapport 8/2002 kun vedrører perioden 1997-2000 og ikke hele den periode, der er omfattet af den igangværende undersøgelse.
Portugal emphasises that the 8/2002 report of the Court of Auditors only relates to the years 1997 to 2000 and not the whole period covered by the current investigation.
Perioden 1993-1997 var kun medtaget i rapporten med det formål at give en generel beskrivelse af RTP's økonomiske situation og omstruktureringsbehov, men er ikke selve genstanden for rapporten.
The years 1993 to 1997 were only covered in the report for the purpose of a general description of RTP’s financial situation and restructuring needs, but do not constitute the very subject matter of the report.
Rapportens formål er at bedømme forvaltningen af RTP, statens rolle som aktionær og bestemmelsen om public service-radio- og tv-virksomheden.
The report purpose is to assess RTP’s management, the role of the State as a shareholder and the provision of the public broadcasting service.
Portugal gør gældende, at revisionsdomstolen overskred sit mandat, nemlig at revidere offentlige finanser, og i stedet iværksatte en analyse af de offentlige udgifters effektivitet, også på omkostningssiden.
Portugal claims that the Court of Auditor exceeded its mandate of auditing public finances and instead entered into an analysis of efficacy and cost effectiveness of the public expenditure.
Rapporten har efter Portugals opfattelse ingen relevans, bortset fra at den udgjorde en uafhængig revision af selskabet, bekræftede Portugals regnskaber og ikke opdagede nogen ulovligheder.
The report has, in the view of Portugal, no relevance except that it constituted an independent audit on the company, confirmed the accounts of Portugal and detected no illegality.
For at afgøre, om de ad hoc-foranstaltninger, som Portugal har iværksat til fordel for RTP, udgør statsstøtte i henhold til artikel 107, stk. 1, i TEUF skal Kommissionen vurdere, om disse foranstaltninger:
In order to ascertain whether the ad hoc measures implemented by Portugal for RTP constitute State aid within the meaning of Article 107(1) of the Treaty, the Commission has to assess whether those measures:
er tildelt af medlemsstaten eller hidrører fra statsmidler
are granted by the Member State or through State resources;
kan fordreje konkurrencevilkårene
are capable of distorting competition;
begunstiger visse virksomheder eller visse produktioner
favour certain undertakings or the production of certain goods;
Tilstedeværelse af statsmidler
Involvement of State resources
Der er statsmidler involveret i fritagelsen for notarial- og registreringsgebyrer samt offentliggørelsesomkostninger, da et tab af skatteprovenu svarer til et forbrug af statsmidler i form af skatteudgifter [60].
State resources are involved in the exemption notarial deed charges, registration charges and publications costs, as a loss of tax revenue is equivalent to the consumption of State resources in the form of fiscal expenditure [60].
For så vidt angår omlægningen af gælden til socialsikringsmyndighederne samt eftergivelsen af renter i tilknytning til de forsinkede betalinger, mener Kommissionen, at den myndighed, der er ansvarlig for socialsikringsordningen, ikke kan betragtes som en virksomhed.
As regards the rescheduling of debt due to the social security scheme and the waiver of interest for late payment, the Commission considers that the body responsible for social security scheme cannot be regarded as an undertaking.
Den udfører ikke økonomisk virksomhed, men er et offentligt organ, der varetager administrationen af socialsikringsordninger [61].
It does not carry out an economic activity but is a public body with the task of administering social security [61].
Endvidere blev tilladelsen til omlægning af gælden ikke besluttet af socialsikringsmyndighederne selv, men ved fælles dekret fra finansministeren og ministeren for sociale anliggender.
Furthermore, the authorisation for the debt rescheduling was given not by the social security scheme itself but by a joint decree of the State Secretaries for Finance and Social Security and the Deputy State Secretary to the Deputy Minister.
Det er således klart, at det drejede sig om statsmidler, og at foranstaltningen kan tilskrives staten.
Therefore, it is clear that State resources were involved and that the measure is attributable to the State.
Kapitalforhøjelserne i RTP blev tilført direkte af staten over statens budget.
The capital increases granted to RTP were provided by the State directly from the public budget.
Det er derfor klart, at en sådan finansiering udgjorde statsmidler i den i artikel 107, stk. 1, i TEUF anførte betydning.
It is therefore clear that such funding constituted State resources within the meaning of Article 107(1) TFEU.
Kommissionen kan ikke acceptere Portugals påstand om, at der ikke er involveret statsmidler i lånet til RTP.
The Commission cannot accept the claim by Portugal that no State resources are involved in the loan to RTP.
I begrebet statsmidler ligger også fordele, som tildeles af organer, der er udpeget eller oprettet af en medlemsstat til dette formål [62].
The concept of State resources also includes advantages granted by bodies designated or established by a Member State for that purpose [62].
Låneaftalen af 1998 blev indgået mellem RTP og Fundo de Regularização da Dívida Pública, som er en fond, der forvaltes af forvaltningsinstituttet for offentlig långivning (Instituto de Gestão do Crédito Público).
The loan contract of 1998 was concluded between RTP and the Public Debt Stabilisation Fund, a fund managed by the Public Debt Management Institute.
Det fremgår af en lovtekst, at instituttet hører under finansministeriet [63].
A legal act determines that the Institute is subject to the authority and supervision of the Minister for Finance [63].
Det kan således konkluderes, at midler tildelt af Fundo de Regularização da Dívida Pública skal betragtes som statsmidler.
It may therefore be concluded that the funds granted by the Public Debt Stabilisation Fund should be regarded as State resources.
Foranstaltningen kan endvidere anses for at kunne tilskrives staten direkte, da det var ved fælles dekret af 17. december 1998 udstedt af medie- og finansministeriet, at aftalevilkårene blev fastlagt.
That measure can be considered as being directly attributable to the State, since a resolution agreed on 17 December 1998 between the Secretary for State for the Media, the Treasury and Finance laid down the conditions of the contract.
Begunstigelse af visse virksomheder
The favouring of certain undertakings
Fritagelse for notarial- og registreringsgebyrer og offentliggørelsesomkostninger: For så vidt angår fritagelse for notarial- og registreringsgebyrer samt offentliggørelsesomkostninger, skal det afgøres, om foranstaltningen indrømmede en generel afgiftsfritagelse til RTP, og om den specifikt anvendes på RTP.
Exemption from notarial deed charges, as well as registration charges and publication costs: As regards the exemption from notarial deed charges, registration charges and publication costs it should be assessed whether that measure conferred a general tax exemption that benefited RTP or whether it applied specifically to RTP.
I nedenstående betragtninger sondrer Kommissionen mellem den foreløbige fritagelse, jf. artikel 11, stk. 1, i lov nr. 21/92, og den permanente fritagelse, der er hjemlet i artikel 11, stk. 2, i lov nr. 21/92.
In the following recitals the Commission distinguishes between the temporary exemption provided for in Article 11(1) of Law No 21/92 and the permanent exemption provided for in Article 11(2) of Law No 21/92.
Foreløbig skattefritagelse i henhold til artikel 11, stk. 1, i lov nr. 21/92
Temporary exemption in accordance with Article 11(1) of Law No 21/92
Det er Kommissionens opfattelse, at fritagelsen for notarial- og registreringsgebyrer samt offentliggørelsesomkostninger indebar en fordel for RTP ved at fritage selskabet for gebyrer, som det ellers skulle have afholdt af dets eget budget.
The Commission finds that the exemption from the necessity of a notarial deed, registration and publication costs conferred an advantage in favour of RTP by relieving it of charges that it would otherwise have to bear from its own budget.
Denne fordel er også materielt selektiv, i og med at den kun tildeles til RTP, som det også fremgår af artikel 11, stk. 1, i lov nr. 21/92.
That advantage is also materially selective by being granted, as Article 11(1) of Law No 21/92 demonstrates, only to RTP.
Det forhold, at loven måske igen bekræfter, således som det anføres af Portugal, anvendelsen af en mere generel lov, nemlig lov nr. 84/88, ændrer ikke noget ved denne konklusion.
The fact that that law might reaffirm, as argued by Portugal, the application of a more general law, namely Law No 84/88, does not change this finding.
Lov nr. 84/88 vedrører offentlige virksomheder og giver sådanne virksomheder mulighed for at blive omdannet til aktieselskaber gennem et lovdekret.
Law No 84/88 refers to public undertakings and provides that such undertakings may be transformed into public limited companies by way of a decree-law.
Men det, at loven henviser til »offentlige virksomheder generelt«, påvirker ikke den materielle selektivitet, der findes i artikel 11, stk. 1, i lov nr. 21/92 til fordel for det specifikke selskab RTP.
However, the fact that that law refers to ‘public undertakings in general’ does not affect the material selectivity found in Article 11(1) of Law No 21/92 in favour of the specific company RTP.
Under alle omstændigheder udgør en fritagelse, som kun gælder for offentlige virksomheder, ligeledes en materielt selektiv foranstaltning for denne gruppe virksomheder (i forhold til private virksomheder), som RTP tilhører.
In any event, an exemption for only public undertakings would likewise constitute a materially selective measure for that group of undertakings (compared to private undertakings), of which RTP forms part.
Den portugisiske retsordens karakter og logik
Nature and logic of the Portuguese legal system
Statsmidler kan imidlertid, selv om de er materielt selektive, ikke falde ind under begrebet selektiv foranstaltning i den i artikel 107, stk. 1, i TEUF anførte betydning, såfremt statsforanstaltningen, i stedet for at afvige fra den normale anvendelse af ordningen, bliver en integreret del af den [64].
State measures can however, despite being materially selective, not fall within the notion of a selective measure within the meaning of Article 107(1) TFEU, if the State measure, instead of derogating from the normal application of the system becomes an inherent part of it [64].
Det er derfor nødvendigt at undersøge, om foranstaltningen var begrundet i den portugisiske retsordens karakter og opbygning, at omdannelsen af den offentlige virksomhed RTP til et aktieselskab skete ved lov, eller om anvendelsen af en lov, der havde til formål at omdanne RTP, havde til formål at tildele selskabet en fordel i forhold til andre virksomheder.
It is therefore necessary to examine whether the measure was compatible with the nature and logic of the Portuguese legal system to transform the public undertaking RTP into a public limited company by way of legislation or whether resource to legislation for the purpose of transforming RTP was chosen in order to confer an advantage to it in relation to other undertakings.
I overensstemmelse med Rettens holdning i sin dom vil Kommissionen i det følgende sondre mellem fritagelsen for notarialomkostninger på den ene side og omkostninger til registrering og offentliggørelse på den anden [65].
In line with the approach by the Court in its judgment, the Commission will in the following distinguish between the exemption from notarial costs on the one hand and registration and publication costs on the other hand [65].
Fritagelse for oprettelse for notar og notarialomkostninger: Det er Kommissionens opfattelse, at omdannelsen af RTP til et aktieselskab og godkendelsen af dets vedtægter ved lov i stedet for ved oprettelse for notar er begrundet i den portugisiske retsordens karakter og logik.
Exemption from the notarial deed and the notarial costs: The Commission finds that the transformation of RTP into a public limited company and the approval of its statutes by way of legislation instead of by a notarial deed complies with the logic and nature of the Portuguese legal system.
Omdannelsen til et aktieselskab skete for at give RTP en mere fleksibel selskabsform og derved stille det på lige fod med private operatører.
The transformation into a public limited company was done in order to give RTP a more flexible company form and thereby put it on an equal footing with private operators.
Når denne omdannelse skete ved lov og ikke ved notarialakt, skyldtes det ikke et forsøg på at omgå kravet om oprettelse for notar, men var et resultat af det generelle princip i portugisisk ret om, at lovmæssige forskrifter kun kan ændres ved tilsvarende lovmæssige forskrifter.
The fact that this transformation was done by law, rather than by a notarial deed, was not an attempt to circumvent the requirement of a notarial deed, but resulted from the general principle of Portuguese law that legislative acts may only be modified by equivalent legislative acts.
Der er heller ikke noget, der tyder på, at RTP’s oprindelige nationalisering i 1975 blev gennemført med det formål at omgå anvendelsen på selskaber, der er reguleret af privatretten og skabte en fordel for selskabet.
There is also nothing to suggest that RTP’s original nationalisation in 1975 was carried out in order to circumvent the applying to companies governed by private law and created a benefit for the company.
Der er intet, der tyder på, at alle de øvrige love, der fandtes inden RTP's omdannelse (se betragtning 84-86 i denne afgørelse) havde til formål at skabe en økonomisk fordel for offentlige virksomheder ved at undgå oprettelse for notar (og de dermed forbundne omkostninger), der finder anvendelse på privatretlige transaktioner.
There is no evidence to suggest that all the other laws in place before RTP’s transformation (see recitals 84 to 86 of this Decision) were for the purpose of creating a pecuniary advantage for public undertakings by avoiding notarial deeds (and the respective costs) applying to private transactions.
Især afspejlede lov nr. 84/88, som tillod offentlige virksomheder at blive omdannet til aktieselskaber gennem et lovdekret, de forfatningsmæssige og retlige principper, der var gældende på det pågældende tidspunkt.
In particular, Law No 84/88 which allowed public undertakings to be transformed into public limited companies by decree-law, reflected the constitutional and legal principles in force at the relevant time.
Konklusion: Under hensyntagen til disse forhold udgør fritagelsen for kravet om at gennemføre omdannelsen af RTP ved oprettelse for notar (og således afholde de respektive omkostninger) ikke statsstøtte som omhandlet i artikel 107, stk. 1, i TEUF.
Conclusion: Taking those matters into consideration, the exemption from the requirement to carry out the RTP transformation via a notarial deed (and thus incur the respective costs) does not constitute State aid within the meaning of Article 107(1) TFEU.
Fritagelsen for registreringsgebyrer og offentliggørelsesomkostninger: Det er nødvendigt at vurdere, om RTP nød godt af ikke at betale nogen omkostninger i forbindelse med selskabets registrering i handelsregistret og offentliggørelsen af notarialakten.
Exemption from registration charges and publication costs: It is necessary to assess whether RTP enjoyed a benefit by not paying any costs linked to the registration of the company in the commercial registry and the publication of the notarial deed.
Ifølge den på daværende tidspunkt gældende portugisiske lovgivning skulle en oprettelse for notar, der formaliserede oprettelsen af et privatretligt reguleret selskab og dettes vedtægter, offentliggøres i Diário da República af den registermyndighed, der havde ansvaret for at delagtiggøre tredjepart i indholdet af disse dokumenter.
In accordance with Portuguese law in force at the time, a notarial deed which formalised the setting up of a company governed by private law and its articles of association had to be published in the Diário da República by the Registrar in charge of the Commercial Registry in order to make third parties aware of the contents of those documents.
RTP afholdt ikke disse offentliggørelsesomkostninger, idet den obligatoriske offentliggørelse af lov nr. 21/92 i Diário da República sikrede, at selve omdannelsen af RTP samt indholdet af dets nye vedtægter blev bragt til offentlighedens kendskab i det nødvendige omfang.
RTP did not incur these publication costs since the mandatory publication in the Diário da República of Law No 21/92 ensured that the act of transformation of RTP and the contents of its new articles of association were afforded the necessary publicity.
Der er ikke nogen indikation af, at Portugal valgte at omdanne RTP til et aktieselskab gennem lov nr. 21/92 med det formål at give RTP en fordel i form af sparede registrerings- og offentliggørelsesomkostninger.
There is no indication that the Portugal chose to transform RTP into a public limited company by way of Law No 21/92 in order to grant RTP an advantage in the form of savings in registration and publication costs.
Det var snarere det forhold, at en yderligere offentliggørelse af RTP's vedtægter ville have været helt meningsløs, idet kravene til gennemsigtighed og offentlighed allerede var opfyldt gennem offentliggørelsen af lov nr. 21/92 i Diário da República.
It was rather that a second publication of RTP’s statutes would have been entirely meaningless as the transparency and publicity requirements were already fulfilled through the publication of Law No 21/92 in the Diário da República.
Hvor der sker registrering med henblik på senere offentliggørelse, og de to foranstaltninger er kædet sammen, er det tvivlsomt, om fritagelsen for registreringsgebyrer også kan begrundes i den portugisiske retsordens karakter og logik og den obligatoriske omdannelse af RTP gennem lovgivning.
While the registration is done with a view to later publication and the two measures are linked, it is questionable whether the exemption from registration charges can also be justified by the nature and logic of the Portuguese legal system and the mandatory conversion of RTP by way of legislation.
Portugal bestrider ikke, at en registrering fortsat var påkrævet i henhold til selskabsloven.
Portugal does not dispute that the registration was still required by the Commercial Companies Code.
Som Portugal anførte: »registreringen blev ikke fjernet, det var blot det forhold, at det ikke var nødvendigt med en oprettelse for notar, men at lovdekretet udgjorde et tilstrækkeligt dokument i registreringsøjemed«.
As Portugal stated: ‘registration was not dispensed with, it was only that no deed was needed, but that the decree-law constituted a sufficient document for registration purposes’.
Dette følger også af artikel 3, stk. 3, i lov nr. 84/88, (se betragtning 25 i denne afgørelse).
This also follows from Article 3(3) of Law No 84/88, (see recital 25 of this Decision).
Desuden understregede Portugal, at for at RTP i fremtiden skulle kunne registrere alle andre selskabsakter, skulle selve selskabets oprettelse (dvs. resultatet af omdannelsen i 1992 til et aktieselskab) registreres [66]. Hvis en registrering imidlertid er nødvendig, ser Kommissionen ikke nogen grund til, hvorfor RTP ikke skulle afholde de dermed forbundne omkostninger.
In addition, Portugal emphasised that in order for RTP to register in the future all other acts relating to the company, the fact of its creation (i.e. the result of the 1992 transformation into a public limited company) needed to be registered [66] If however, registration is necessary, then the Commission sees no reason why RTP should not have to bear the corresponding charges.
Konklusion: Det skal konkluderes, at RTP's fritagelse for kravet om en notarialakt (og dermed notarialomkostninger) samt fritagelsen for kravet om offentliggørelse og de dermed forbundne offentliggørelsesomkostninger i henhold til artikel 11, stk. 1, i lov nr. 21/92, ikke udgør statsstøtte i den i artikel 107, stk. 1, i TEUF anførte betydning.
Conclusion: It should be concluded that the exemption of RTP from the requirement of a notarial deed (including notarial costs), as well as the exemption from the requirement for publication and the respective publication costs according to Article 11(1) of Law No 21/92, do not constitute State aid within the meaning of Article 107(1) TFEU.
Fritagelsen for registreringsgebyrer i henhold til artikel 11, stk. 1, i lov nr. 21/92 udgør statsstøtte.
The exemption from registration charges according to Article 11(1) of Law No 21/92 does constitute State aid.