natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Med henblik på at afgøre, om den forlængede løbetid skulle indrømmes, skal parametrene for vurdering af værdien af Letlands investering i Citadele i juni 2013 derfor omfatte de tilsagn, der er fastsat i den endelige afgørelse om Parex.
The Commission considers that a profit-guided market investor would have started by establishing the present value of its investment in the bank and then would have ascertained if the current value of that investment would be protected by the additional maturity extension of the subordinated loans.
Letland har ikke fremlagt bevis for, at staten tog alle disse parametre i betragtning, eller at den værdi af statens investering på daværende tidspunkt, der ville være resultatet af indregningen af disse parametre, ville overstige offeromkostningerne til indrømmelsen af den forlængede løbetid.
If the result of that examination showed that the value could have been protected or even increased, then, as a second step, a profit-driven market i nvestor would have compared the opportunity cost of safeguarding (or even increasing) the value and the difference in value.
Kommissionen mener derfor, at den anden foranstaltning ikke er i overensstemmelse med den adfærd, der forventes af en markedsøkonomisk investor i en position svarende til Letlands position i juni 2013.
If Latvia had engaged in such analysis, Latvia should have demonstrated that the granting of the prolonged maturity was an effective measure to at least safeguard the value of the investment and then should have demonstrated that the opportunity cost of providing such measure was less than the increase of value.
Selv om Letland havde udført en tilstrækkeligt detaljeret analyse af den anden foranstaltning med det formål at sikre værdien af statens investering i Citadele pr. juni 2013, og selv om Letland i en sådan analyse havde indregnet de begrænsninger, som en markedsøkonomisk investor ville have taget i betragtning som følge af det forestående salg af Citadele og det separate frasalg af formueforvaltningsaktiviteten, er Letlands påstande med hensyn til omkostningerne ved den anden foranstaltning og værdien af investeringen i Citadele, der angiveligt blev sikret ved denne foranstaltning, for det tredje ikke plausible.
Only if the opportunity costs of providing the additional maturity were less than the value preservation resulting from the Second Measure could the Commission can accept that Latvia has acted in line with the market economy operator principle.
Letland hævder på den ene side, at den anden foranstaltning ikke medførte nogen omkostninger for staten, men denne påstand underbygges ikke af yderligere oplysninger eller beviser vedrørende den omkostningsvurdering, som Letland udførte, da den anden foranstaltning blev indrømmet.
However, Latvia has provided neither a contemporaneous assessment of the value of the investment nor an analysis demonstrating that the opportunity costs of providing the additional maturity were less than the value preservation resulting from the implementation of the Second Measure.
En privat investor, der skal træffe en rationel beslutning om, hvorvidt løbetiden for efterstillede lån skal forlænges, vil foretage en sådan analyse af offeromkostningerne og andre typer omkostninger vedrørende den anden foranstaltning.
For that reason, the Commission considers that the Second Measure cannot be considered to be in line with the behaviour of a market economy operator finding itself in a comparable position to that of Latvia in June 2013.
Den manglende evaluering af omkostningerne får Kommissionen til at konkludere, at en privat investor ikke ville have været i stand til at vurdere, hvorvidt den anden foranstaltning ville være fordelagtig med hensyn til overskudsmaksimering.
In the second place and in any event, established principles for the application of the market economy operator principle require the comparison with the behaviour of a rational private investor to be made in a situation which is as close as possible to that of the Member State [28].
Alle de beviser, der er til rådighed for Kommissionen, antyder, at værdien af Letlands investering i Citadele i juni 2013 var lav, hvis den overhovedet var positiv.
In consequence, when assessing the value of its investment in Citadele, Latvia should have taken into consideration the commitments recorded in the Parex Final Decision relating to the sale of Citadele.
Med hensyn til fremtidige indtjeningsstrømme fra Le tlands investering i Citadele er der ikke fremlagt beviser, som antyder, at aktionærer i juni 2013 kunne forvente udbytte fra Citadele inden for overskuelig fremtid.
In June 2013, at the time the Second Measure was implemented, those commitments included obligations to divest Citadele by 31 December 2014 and also to divest Citadele without the Wealth Management Business (since the Wealth Management Business had to be divested separately if it had not been sold by 30 June 2013).
Da forlængelsen af løbetiden blev indrømmet, var der ikke bevis for, at Citadele (i betragtning af bankens forventede overskud og kapitalprocent) ville kunne udbetale udbytte inden den 31. december 2014, efter som den kapitalprocent på 10,3 %, der efter planen skulle opnås pr. 31. december 2013, kun lige netop oversteg den krævede minimumskapitalprocent på 10 % og ville ligge langt under den kapitalprocent på […] %, der blev anbefalet af FCMC for at afhjælpe de eksisterende og potentielle risici for Citadele.
Considering that on 27 June 2013, when the maturity extension was granted, no buyer had been found for the Wealth Management Business, a private investor's conclusion would have been that it was not possible to sell the Wealth Management Business together with Citadele by the deadline of 30 June 2013 established by the Parex Final Decision, and therefore the two entities had to be sold separately.
En privat investor ville derfor have taget det forhold i betragtning, at det pr. juni 2013 var usandsynligt, at aktionærer forventede udbetaling af udbytte fra Citadele inden for overskuelig fremtid.
Moreover, a private shareholder of the bank in a situation as close as possible to that of the Member State would have had no grounds to assume that the fulfilment of those commitments would be waived or postponed, since any such modifications were subject to the Commission's approval.
Med hensyn til kapitalværdien af Letlands investering i Citadele i juni 2013 viser den undersøgelse, som de lettiske myndigheder har indgivet som anført i betragtning 61, og som var udarbejdet i februar 2013, at Citadele ville være blevet negativt berørt af det separate frasalg af formueforvaltningsaktiviteten.
Therefore, when establishing the value of the investment in June 2013, there could be no expectation that those obligations would be irrelevant as it could not be assumed that the Commission would approve any modification of either obligation prior to the period within which Latvia had committed to execute them.
En privat investor i en situation, der er så tæt på Letlands situation i juni 2013 som muligt, ville have taget højde for den kendsgerning, at en uafhængig ekspert omkring fire måneder tidligere havde slået fast, at salgsværdien af Citadele uden formueforvaltningsaktiviteten ville være lavere end værdien af de to enheder i kombination.
In consequence, for the purpose of deciding whether or not to grant the prolonged maturity, the parameters for assessing the value of Latvia's investment in Citadele in June 2013 must include the commitments that are recorded in the Parex Final Decision.
Letland har dog ikke fremlagt bevis for sådanne vægtige grunde til, at en markedsøkonomisk investor skulle påtage sig sådanne yderligere risici på daværende tidspunkt.
For that reason also, the Commission considers that the Second Measure cannot be considered to be in line with the behaviour of a market economy operator finding itself in a comparable position to that of Latvia in June 2013.
Selv om forlængelsen af løbetiden blev indrømmet, var det ikke bevis for, at Citadele uden formueforvaltningsaktiviteten kunne sælges til […], hvilket får Kommissionen til at konkludere, at Letland pr. juni 2013 ikke havde […], til at statens investering kunne sikres, som var […] for at indrømme den anden foranstaltning.
In the third place, even if Latvia had carried out a sufficiently detailed analysis of the Second Measure as a means of preserving the value of its investment in Citadele as of June 2013 and even if it had factored into such an analysis the constraints which a market economy operator would have taken into account arising from the impending sale of Citadele and the separate divestment of the Wealth Management Business, the assertions of Latvia as to the costs of the Second Measure and the level of value of the investment in Citadele supposedly preserved by that measure are not plausible.
For det fjerde og endelig bemærker Kommissionen, at EBRD, som i juni 2013 var den eneste anden aktionær i Citadele ud over den lettiske stat, ikke forlængede løbetiden for sine efterstillede lån til Citadele, og at Letland ikke henvendte sig til EBRD for at drøfte sidstnævntes deltagelse i den anden foranstaltning, jf. betragtning 46, 47 og 48.
Such an analysis of the opportunity costs and any other type of costs linked to the Second Measure would have been a prerequisite for a private investor seeking to make a rational decision on whether to extend the maturity of the subordinated loan.
Dette manglende forsøg på at drøfte en deling af omkostningsbyrden i forbindelse med den anden foranstaltning, hvis denne foranstaltning skulle være et middel til at sikre værdien af investeringerne i Citadele, er endnu et tegn på, at den anden foranstaltning ikke var i overensstemmelse med kravene i det markedsøkonomiske investorprincip.
The absence of a cost evaluation leads the Commission to conclude that a private investor would not have been able to assess the desirability of the Second Measure in terms of profit maximisation.
I den henseende fremhæver Kommissionen først, at Citadele i henhold til brev fra FCMC havde 10 måneder (1.3.-31.12.2013) til at overholde det nye kapitalkrav.
On the other hand, while Latvia submits that the Second Measure preserved the value of Latvia's investment in Citadele, that claim is not borne out by the characteristics of the investment in Citadele held by the Member State as of June 2013.
I den forbindelse er Kommissionen af den opfattelse, at en majoritetsaktionær ville have udnyttet hele perioden på 10 måneder til at finde en hensigtsmæssig løsning, der ville gøre det muligt at efterleve det nye kapitalkrav og samtidig minimere omkostningerne.
The Commission notes that for a profit-driven investor the current value of an investment is dependent on the prospect of future income streams from that investment (in the form of, for example, dividends) in combination with the capital value of that investment at that moment in time (which can be derived, for example, from the price which a purchaser would pay for the shareholder's investment at that moment or from the time-discounted value of the price which a purchaser would pay for the shareholder's investment in the future).
Letlands argument vedrørende fremme af salget af Citadele forklarer ikke, hvorfor den anden foranstaltning blev vedtaget uden henvendelse til minoritetsaktionæren i Citadele kun fire måneder efter FCMC's brev i stedet for at udnytte den periode på 10 måneder, man havde til rådighed.
All of the indices available to the Commission point to the value of Latvia's investment in Citadele in June 2013 having been low, if it had a positive value at all.
Selv hvis EBRD's deltagelse i en forlængelse af løbetiden havde resulteret i en foranstaltning af en anden karakter end den anden foranstaltning, har Letland ikke fremlagt bevis for, at en sådan foranstaltning med deltagelse af EBRD ville have været mindre effektiv end den anden foranstaltning, eller at den ville have medført flere omkostninger for majoritetsaktionæren end den anden foranstaltning.
As regards possible future income streams from Latvia's investment in Citadele, no evidence has been provided indicating that in June 2013 shareholders could expect any dividends from Citadele at any point in the foreseeable future.
Med hensyn til Letlands argument om, at det ville have medført yderligere byrder på tidspunktet for salget af Citadele, hvis EBRD havde forlænget løbetiden for sine efterstillede lån, har de lettiske myndigheder ikke fremlagt dokumentation for, at en sådan forlængelse rent faktisk ville have medført sådanne yderligere omkostninger.
Any assessment by a private shareholder of the bank in a situation as close as possible to that of the Member State of expected revenues from dividends distribution would have been linked to the obligation to divest Citadele by 31 December 2014.
Der er ikke udført en specifik undersøgelse af omkostningerne til frasalg af Citadele efter den anden foranstaltning sammenlignet med omkostningerne til et hypotetisk salg af Citadele efter en forlængelse med deltagelse af EBRD for at underbygge Letlands påstand om, at der ville have opstået yderligere byrder.
Moreover, the study described in recital 61 established that Citadele without the Wealth Management Business would become loss making, a conclusion which further reduced the prospect of benefit from any dividends distribution given that as of 27 June 2013 a market economy operator would have had to assume that Citadele and the Wealth Management Business would be divested separately.
Kommissionen mener derfor, at en privat investor, der overvejer, hvordan han bedst sikrer værdien af sin investering i Citadele, i det mindste ville have foretaget en samtidig vurdering af de omkostninger, der med henblik på et efterfølgende salg ville opstå, hvis minoritetsaktionæren i Citadele forlængede løbetiden for sine efterstillede lån til banken.
As such, when the maturity extension was provided, there was no evidence that Citadele would be able (considering its expected profits and capital ratio) to distribute dividends before 31 December 2014, since the 10,3 % capital ratio planned to be achieved for 31 December 2013 would only barely exceed the required minimum capital ratio of 10 % and would be far below the […] % capital ratio recommended by the FCMC to address existing and potential risks for Citadele.
Som bemærket i betragtning 48, litra c), forklarer Letland endelig, at man mente, at EBRD ville have været villig til at forlænge løbetid for sine lån til Citadele.
Therefore, a private investor would have taken into consideration that as of June 2013 there was a low probability that shareholders could have expected any dividends distribution from Citadele in the foreseeable future.
På grundlag af det markedsøkonomiske investorprincip kan Kommissionen ikke godtage, at en majoritetsaktionær i et selskab ville have påtaget sig alle omkostningerne til at sikre værdien af alle investeringer i selskabet og derved sikret værdien af investeringen for en minoritetsaktionær uden overhovedet at henvende sig til sidstnævnte for at få vedkommende til at bidrage.
As regards the capital value of Latvia's investment in Citadele in June 2013, the study submitted by the Latvian authorities which is described in recital 61 and which was drawn up in February 2013 shows that Citadele would have been negatively affected by the separate divestment of the Wealth Management Business.
I lyset af disse faktorer er den manglende henvendelse til EBRD i perioden mellem den 1. marts 2013 og den 27. juni 2013 endnu et tegn på, at den anden foranstaltning ikke blev gennemført i overensstemmelse med kravene i det markedsøkonomiske investorprincip.
A private investor in a situation which is as close as possible to that of Latvia in June 2013 would have taken into account the fact that about four months earlier an independent expert had established that the sale value of Citadele without the Wealth Management Business would be lower than that of the two entities combined.
Af hver af de fire grunde, der er anført i betragtning 85-103, er der ikke utvetydigt og på grundlag af objektive elementer, som kan efterprøves, ført bevis for, at medlemsstaten traf beslutningen om at gennemføre foranstaltningen i sin egenskab af aktionær.
As a result, such a private investor would have needed compelling reasons in terms of risk-adjusted return maximisation to take additional risks by granting the extension of the maturity of the subordinated loans.
Under disse omstændigheder mener Kommissionen ikke, at Citadele under omstændigheder svarende til normale markedsvilkår kunne have opnået samme fordel, som den opnåede via de statslige ressourcer i form af den anden foranstaltning.
However, Latvia has provided no evidence of such compelling reasons for a market economy operator to assume those additional risks at that time.
Letland har gennemført den anden foranstaltning for Citadele, som er og også fortsat vil være aktiv på markeder, der er åbne for international konkurrence.
As such, even if the maturity extension was provided, there was no evidence that Citadele without the Wealth Management Business could be sold at […] which leads the Commission to conclude that in June 2013 Latvia did not have […] in its investment to be preserved which was […] for providing the Second Measure.
Derfor vil en fordel på grund af statsmidler berøre konkurrencen i banksektoren og have en indvirkning på samhandelen i Unionen.
Those further reasons also lead the Commission to consider that the Second Measure cannot be considered to be in line with the behaviour of a market economy operator finding itself in a comparable position to that of Latvia in June 2013.
Endvidere er foranstaltningen selektiv, fordi den kun begunstiger Citadele.
In the fourth and final place, the Commission also notes that the EBRD, which in June 2013 was the only other shareholder of Citadele apart from the Latvian State, did not prolong the maturity of its outstanding subordinated loan to Citadele and that Latvia never approached the EBRD to discuss the latter's participation in the Second Measure, as explained in recitals 46 to 48.
Den finansieres af statsmidler.
That absence of any attempt to discuss sharing the burden of the cost of the Second Measure if that measure was to be a means to preserve the value of investments in Citadele is an additional indication that the Second Measure was not in line with the requirements of the market economy operator principle.
Kommissionen bekræfter derfor sin tidligere foreløbige vurdering i indledningsafgørelsen om, at den anden foranstaltning udgør yderligere statsstøtte.
In that context, the Commission considers that a majority shareholder would have exploited the entire 10-month period in order identify an adequate solution to meet the new capital requirement which minimised its own costs.
Den tredje foranstaltning
As such, Latvia's argument regarding the facilitation of the sale of Citadele does not explain why the Second Measure was adopted without any approach to the minority shareholder of Citadele within 4 months of the FCMC letter rather exploiting more of the period of up to 10 months that could have been taken.
Med hensyn til den likviditetsstøtte, der blev ydet til Reverta, blev den oprindeligt godkendt som en del af de forenelige statsstøtteforanstaltninger i den første redningsbeslutning i form af statsindlån.
Furthermore, even if the participation of the EBRD in a maturity extension would have involved a measure with characteristics different from those of the Second Measure, Latvia does not provide any evidence that such a different measure including the EBRD would have been less effective than the Second Measure or that it would have been more costly to the majority shareholder compared with the costs of the Second Measure itself.
På daværende tidspunkt bemærkede Kommissionen, at Parex banka manglede likvid sikkerhed, og at Letland havde tilført midlerne på baggrund af bankens likviditetsbehov på et tidspunkt, hvor ingen markedsøkonomisk investor var villig til at indskyde likviditet som følge af Parex bankas skrøbelige situation [29].
As for Latvia's argument that an extension by the EBRD of the maturity of its subordinated loan would have led to additional burdens at the time of the sale of Citadele, the Latvian authorities have not produced any element to show that such an extension would in fact have created such additional costs.
Efter den endelige afgørelse om Parex (og opsplitningen i en god bank og en bad bank) blev likviditetsstøtten overført til Citadele og Reverta.
No specific study of the costs of divestment of Citadele after the Second Measure compared with the costs of a hypothetical sale of Citadele after an extension in which the EBRD participated has been carried out to justify Latvia's assertion that there would have been additional burdens.
Førstnævnte har allerede tilbagebetalt hele sin andel af likviditetsstøtten.
The Commission considers that any private operator considering how to preserve the value of its investment in Citadele would at least be able to point to a contemporaneous evaluation of what were in relation to a subsequent sale those alternate costs of having the minority shareholder in Citadele extend the duration of its subordinated loans to that bank.
Reverta skulle begrænse den likviditetsstøtte, den modtog, som anført i betragtning 19, litra c).
Finally, as noted in recital 48(c), Latvia explains that it believed that the EBRD would have been willing to extend the maturity of its loans to Citadele.
Det beløb i likviditetsstøtte, der rent faktisk blev ydet til Reverta, overstiger endda de niveauer, der er fastsat for det værst tænkelige scenarie, som var godkendt i den endelige afgørelse om Parex.
In that situation, even if the EBRD's involvement would have led to more complexity, the Commission considers that a private majority shareholder which was contemplating extending the maturity of its own existing subordinated debt in favour of Citadele would have at least made an approach to the minority shareholder which was also a holder of subordinated debt of Citadele to see if the latter would have either: (i) shared the costs of the additional support to Citadele by extending its own loans' maturity date; or (ii) entered into some alternative arrangement dir ectly with the majority shareholder to defray the costs of the Second Measure to the majority shareholder.
Denne yderligere likviditetsstøtte giver Reverta en yderligere fordel sammenlignet med den støtte, der var godkendt i redningsbeslutningerne og den endelige afgørelse om Parex.
Within the application of the market economy operator principle the Commission cannot accept that a majority shareholder of a company would have accepted all of the cost of protecting the value of all investments in that company and thereby have protected the value of the investment of a minority shareholder without even approaching the latter to seek a contribution from it.
Letland har ikke påstået, at staten optrådte som markedsøkonomisk långiver, da den tilførte denne likviditet, og Letland har heller ikke fremlagt bevis, som sætter Kommissionen i stand til at konkludere, at Reverta under omstændigheder svarende til normale markedsvilkår kunne have opnået samme fordel, som den opnåede via de statslige ressourcer i form af den tredje foranstaltning.
In view of each of those factors, the absence of any approach to the EBRD in the period between 1 March 2013 and 27 June 2013 is a further indication that the Second Measure was not conducted in compliance with the requirements of the market economy operator principle.
Ingen af de andre elementer af likviditetsstøtten er ændret, bortset fra dens størrelse, og Kommissionen konkluderer derfor, at foranstaltningen udgør statsstøtte.
For each of the four reasons set out in recitals 85 to 103, it has not been established unequivocally and on the basis of objective and verifiable evidence that the Second Measure is to be ascribed to the Member State acting as private shareholder.