natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
De franske myndigheder skønner desuden, at selv om henlæggelserne til fornyelse af RAG udløste en fordel, ville denne fordel være at betragte som udlignet af den forhøjede selskabsskat, der blev betalt i 1997.
Second, the French authorities claimed that, even if EDF had not set aside provisions for the renewal of the RAG, it would still not have been liable for the payment of corporation tax between 1987 and 1996 because of the carry-over of large tax losses.
De vurderer ligeledes, at EDF i perioden 1987-1996 samlet betalte et større beløb i selskabsskat til staten end et kommercielt selskab, som ikke havde foretaget henlæggelser til fornyelse af RAG, og som havde udbetalt dividende til sin aktionær svarende til 37,5 % af nettoresultatet efter skat.
Furthermore, since the state was both the owner of EDF and the grantor of the concession on the RAG, they considered that the grantor rights did not provide it with a genuinely enforceable claim.
De franske myndigheder finder i øvrigt, at selv om der var konstateret en uberettiget fordel, ville der være tale om eksisterende støtte og ikke om ny støtte på grund af den 10-årige forældelsesfrist i henhold til artikel 15 i Rådets forordning (EF) nr. 659/1999 [10], som løb fra tildelingen af den første støtte.
Consequently, when the balance sheet was restructured in 1997, they assigned those rights to EDF's capital and reserves in order to correct its under-capitalisation, but without subjecting them to corporation tax.
Eftersom Kommissionens første anmodning om oplysninger er dateret den 10. juli 2001, ville eventuel støtte tildelt før 1991 være forældet.
The French authorities took the view that the restructuring of EDF's accounts in 1997 could be interpreted as a capital contribution of an amount equivalent to the partial tax exemption, the aim of which was also to correct under-capitalisation.
De franske myndigheder skønner ikke, at lovgivningsindgrebet i 1997 havde opsættende virkning på denne forældelsesfrist, idet kun foranstaltninger truffet af Kommissionen kan have denne virkning.
EDF and the state would have liked to allocate the quasi-own assets to capital, leaving aside the question of corporation tax.
Endelig mener de franske myndigheder, at der under alle omstændigheder ville være tale om eksisterende støtte, idet den blev tildelt forud for liberaliseringen af elmarkedet.
It was thought that it would be more efficient and more neutral to allocate the grantor rights directly, and in their full amount, to own funds, rather than to carry out the equivalent transaction, which would have entailed assigning to capital a net amount after corporation tax, requesting EDF to pay corporation tax in an amount equal to the variation in net worth and, finally, making an additional capital contribution in an amount equal to the tax paid.
I deres brev af 20. november 2003 gentager de franske myndigheder deres argumenter vedrørende opskrivningsbeløbene, der er medregnet i beløbet for koncessionsafgifterne i selskabets regnskaber, og vedrørende anvendelsen af forældelsesreglen.
The French authorities took the view that an additional contribution was justified by EDF's projected profits in 1997, which were in fact achieved during subsequent years.
Endvidere hævder de, at selskabsskattesatsen, som skulle have været anvendt på omposteringerne på EDF's balance, er satsen fra 1996 (36,67 %) og ikke fra 1997 (41,66 %).
According to the French authorities, in comparable circumstances, a private investor in a market economy would have made such a capital contribution.
De anser nemlig denne ompostering for at være foretaget på grundlag af en selvangivelse indgivet den 23. december 1997, dvs. efter afslutningen af regnskabsåret 1996, men inden regnskabsåret 1997.
They also denied that the remuneration of the state had been unduly reduced between 1987 and 1996 as a result of the creation of the provisions in question.
De franske myndigheder afviser således Kommissionens påstand om, at EDF blev tildelt en fordel i 1997 som følge af den manglende betaling af selskabsskat af en del af de skattefrie henlæggelser til fornyelse af RAG.
They argued that, even if the net result had been higher, the remuneration of the state would not have been increased since, during that period, the level of that remuneration did not correspond to a predetermined percentage of EDF's net result.
AFGØRELSER TRUFFET AF DEN EUROPÆISKE UNIONS RETSINSTANSER
The level was determined freely by the state in absolute terms and did not necessarily depend on EDF's financial situation.
Ved dom af 15. december 2009 annullerede Retten Kommissionens beslutning af 16. december 2003 med den begrundelse, at det påhvilede Kommissionen at verificere, om en fornuftig privat markedsøkonomisk investor under lignende omstændigheder ville have foretaget en beløbsmæssigt sammenlignelig investering.
Nor did the remuneration have to be deducted from the net profits for each year.
Retten vurderede, at Kommissionen burde have kontrolleret, om transaktionen opfyldte kriteriet om det markedsøkonomiske investorprincip.
In view of the foregoing, and given the losses carried over by EDF, the French authorities stressed that between 1987 and 1996 the state had in fact taken a dividend considerably in excess of the limits laid down by company law.
Retten fandt således, at Kommissionen havde begået en retlig fejl og overtrådt artikel 107 i TEUF.
The French authorities also considered that, even if the creation of provisions for the renewal of the RAG had resulted in an advantage, that advantage had to be regarded as cancelled out by the increase in corporation tax paid in 1997.
Ved dom af 5. juni 2012 forkastede Domstolen den appel, som Kommissionen havde iværksat med påstand om ophævelse af Rettens dom.
They claimed that, over the period from 1987 to 1996, EDF paid more to the state overall than the corporation tax that would have been paid by a commercial company which did not create provisions for the renewal of the RAG and which paid its shareholder a dividend equal to 37,5 % of its net result after tax.
Domstolen fandt navnlig, at Rettens konstatering af, at der bestod en forpligtelse for Kommissionen til at undersøge, om kapitalen var tilført af staten under omstændigheder, der svarede til normale markedsvilkår, uanset under hvilken form denne kapital var blevet til tilført, ikke var behæftet med en retlig fejl.
The French authorities also argued that, if EDF were found to have benefited from an undue advantage, it would constitute existing aid and not new aid on account of the expiry of the 10-year limitation period laid down in Article 15 of Council Regulation (EC) No 659/1999 [10], which started to run from the date on which the initial aid was granted.
Domstolen skønnede også, at Rettens vurdering af, at det markedsøkonomiske investorprincip også kan være gældende, selv om der er anvendt midler af skattemæssig art, heller ikke er behæftet med en retlig fejl.
Since the Commission's first request for information was made on 10 July 2001, any aid granted before 1991 would be time-barred.
AFGØRELSE OM AT UDVIDE DEN FORMELLE UNDERSØGELSESPROCEDURE
The French authorities took the view that the legislative measures adopted in 1997 did not suspend the limitation period since only action by the Commission could have that effect.
Som følge af annulleringen af beslutningen af 16. december 2003 skal Kommissionen vedtage en ny afgørelse i medfør af artikel 266 i TEUF og artikel 13 i forordning (EF) nr. 659/1999 for at afslutte proceduren, idet den efterlever de retlige spørgsmål, der blev endeligt afgjort ved Domstolens dom.
The French authorities argued finally that the measure would constitute existing aid in any event since it was granted prior to the liberalisation of the electricity market.
Da beslutningen af 16. december 2003 var blevet annulleret, skulle Kommissionen på ny undersøge spørgsmålene om artikel 3 og 4 i denne beslutning.
In their letter dated 20 November 2003, the French authorities reiterated their arguments concerning the revaluation reserves included in the amount of the grantor rights appearing in the accounts and concerning application of the limitation rule.
Dels vurderede hverken Domstolen eller Retten, at indledningsbeslutningen var behæftet med uregelmæssigheder.
Moreover, they claimed that the rate of corporation tax that should have been applied when EDF's balance sheet was restructured was the 1996 rate (36,67 %) and not the 1997 rate (41,66 %).
Den kan derfor danne grundlag for en ny endelig afgørelse.
They considered that the restructuring was carried out on the basis of a tax return filed on 23 December 1997, after closure of the accounts for 1996 but before the 1997 accounts were finalised.
Dels har Domstolen klart udstukket kriterier for anvendelighed og anvendelse af det markedsøkonomiske investorprincip.
The French authorities thus disputed the Commission's claim that EDF benefited from an advantage in 1997 on account of the non-payment of corporation tax on some of the provisions created free of tax for the renewal of the high-voltage transmission network.
Disse kriterier støtter sig navnlig på eksistensen af objektiv og verificerbar dokumentation for, at medlemsstaten ganske rigtigt besluttede at foretage en investering i den kontrollerede offentlige virksomhed på grundlag af økonomiske vurderinger, som var sammenlignelige med dem, som en fornuftig privat markedsøkonomisk investor ville have fået udarbejdet inden investeringen for at fastslå dens fremtidige rentabilitet [11].
JUDGMENTS BY THE EU COURTS
I afgørelsen om at udvide den formelle undersøgelsesprocedure bemærkede Kommissionen, at der på dette tidspunkt i den administrative procedure ikke fandtes beviser, dokumentation eller dokumenter til støtte for de franske myndigheders påstand om, at den regnskabsmæssige ompostering i 1997 udgjorde en supplerende kapitaltilførsel på et beløb svarende til den delvise skattefritagelse.
By its judgment of 15 December 2009, the General Court annulled the Commission's decision of 16 December 2003 on the ground that it was incumbent on the Commission to determine whether a private investor would have invested a comparable amount in similar circumstances.
I modsætning til de franske myndigheders opfattelse fremgik det heller ikke, at en sådan supplerende kapitaltilførsel ikke skulle være en støtte, men en investering, som en fornuftig privat markedsøkonomisk investor under sammenlignelige omstændigheder ville have foretaget på baggrund af prognoserne for EDF's rentabilitet i 1997, som i øvrigt blev opfyldt i de følgende år.
The General Court took the view that the Commission should have checked whether the operation satisfied the private investor test.
Derfor præciserede Kommissionen i udvidelsesafgørelsen på baggrund af de tilgængelige oplysninger og dokumenter sin foreløbige analyse af den eventuelle økonomiske fordel, som opstod ved EDF's manglende betaling i 1997 af selskabsskatten på den del af henlæggelserne, der svarede til de 14,119 mia. FRF i koncessionsafgifter, som blev konverteret til kapitaltilførsler.
The General Court therefore considered that the Commission had committed an error of law and infringed Article 107 of the TFEU.
I den henseende syntes den overordnede bedømmelse af de foreliggende omstændigheder at være den, at denne foranstaltning udgik fra en offentlig myndighed, og at det markedsøkonomiske investorprincip dermed ikke var anvendeligt.
In its judgment of 5 June 2012, the Court of Justice dismissed the appeal brought by the Commission against the judgment of the General Court.
Til støtte for deres påstand havde de franske myndigheder da heller ikke fremlagt oplysninger eller en forretningsplan udarbejdet før eller samtidig med beslutningen om ikke at opkræve skat hos EDF, som kunne bevise rentabiliteten i en sådan operation.
The Court of Justice considered that the finding made by the General Court, to the effect that the obligation for the Commission to verify whether the capital had been provided by the state in circumstances corresponding to normal market conditions existed regardless of the way in which that capital had been provided by the state, was not vitiated by an error of law.
I faktisk henseende bemærkede Kommissionen med hensyn til de kriterier, som Domstolen fremførte, at Frankrig passende kunne fremlægge behørig dokumentation for dateringen af de fremlagte dokumenter og bevis for, at de var blevet gennemgået af de kompetente ministre og embedsmænd og af det franske parlaments to kamre før vedtagelsen af den anfægtede beslutning.
The Court of Justice also took the view that the General Court did not err in law either in finding that the private investor test may be applicable even where fiscal means have been employed.
I mangel af denne dokumentation forekommer Frankrig i stedet som ligningsmyndighed at have undtaget omposteringen på EDF's balance fra selskabsbeskatning, hvad angår konverteringen af henlæggelserne af koncessionsafgifter i henhold til artikel 4 i lov nr. 97-1026.
DECISION TO EXTEND THE FORMAL INVESTIGATION PROCEDURE
Der var ingen udtrykkelig budgetbestemmelse, ifølge hvilken disse skatterelaterede midler på forhånd var tildelt EDF, ej heller var der taget regler eller kontroller angående investeringer i anvendelse for at sikre et retsgrundlag for den påståede investering.
As a result of the annulment of the decision of 16 December 2003, the Commission had to adopt a new decision under Article 266 of the TFEU and Article 13 of Regulation (EC) No 659/1999 terminating the procedure by complying with the points of law established definitively by the judgment of the General Court.
I den henseende føjede Kommissionen til de faktorer, som en fornuftig privat investor ville have undersøgt før sin investering, dels usikkerheden, hvad angik summen af og udviklingen i de pensionsfinansieringsomkostninger, som EDF skulle afholde i 1997 ifølge sin egen ordning, dels den vurdering, som en investor kunne foretage heraf på det pågældende tidspunkt.
Since the decision of 16 December 2003 had been annulled, the Commission had to re-examine the questions relating to Articles 3 and 4 of that decision.
Under disse omstændigheder forekom den delvise fritagelse for selskabsskat i 1997 ikke at være en produktiv investering fra den statslige aktionærs side, men snarere en undtagelsesforanstaltning af skattemæssig art, som kunne have sikret EDF en økonomisk fordel.
On the one hand, neither the Court of Justice nor the General Court had found that the opening decision was irregular.
Det fremgik i øvrigt, at den manglende opkrævning af skyldig selskabsskat hos EDF indebar statslige midler og kunne påvirke konkurrencen og samhandelen mellem medlemsstaterne og dermed opfylde de øvrige betingelser for anvendelse af artikel 107, stk. 1, i TEUF.
It could therefore form the basis for a new final decision.
I mangel af et retsgrundlag til støtte for, at en driftsstøtte, der styrkede EDF's stilling i forhold til konkurrenterne, kunne være forenelig med det indre marked, udtrykte Kommissionen i sin afgørelse af 2. maj 2013 tvivl om støttens forenelighed med det indre marked.
On the other hand, the General Court clearly laid down the conditions governing the applicability and application of the private investor test.
Den havde allerede udtrykt lignende tvivl i sin indledningsbeslutning.
These criteria were based on the existence of objective and verifiable evidence showing that the decision by the Member State was to make an investment in the public undertaking on the basis of economic evaluations comparable to those which a rational private investor would have had carried out, before making the investment, in order to determine its future profitability [11].
BEMÆRKNINGER FRA TREDJEMAND
In the decision to extend the formal investigation procedure, the Commission noted that, at that stage of the administrative procedure, there was no evidence, demonstration or document to support the statement by the French authorities that the accounting reform of 1997 could be interpreted as a capital contribution of an amount equivalent to the partial tax exemption.
Ifølge EDF fortsætter Kommissionen således med at analysere den foranstaltning, som den franske stat traf i 1997, alene ud fra de påståede skattemæssige konsekvenser heraf, mens Retten klart afviste denne tilgang.
Contrary to the observations by the French authorities, nor was such a capital contribution an investment rather than an aid measure which a rational private investor in a market economy would have made in comparable circumstances, justified by EDF's projected profits in 1997, which were in fact achieved during subsequent years.
Som Retten udtalte, udgør den foranstaltning, som staten iværksatte, da den omposterede koncessionsafgifterne som kapitaltilførsel, en rekapitalisering af EDF, som skulle afhjælpe underskuddet på EDF's balance med henblik på liberaliseringen af energimarkederne.
Accordingly, in the extension decision, the Commission set out, in the light of the available information and documents, its preliminary analysis of the potential economic advantage arising from the non-payment by EDF in 1997 of corporation tax on the part of the provisions corresponding to the FRF 14,119 billion in grantor rights which were reclassified as capital contributions.
Brevet fra økonomiministeren af 22. december 1997 indeholder ikke en særskilt skattemæssig beslutning i forhold til 1997-loven, men blot en konstatering af de skattemæssige konsekvenser.
In that regard, the overall assessment of the facts of the case seemed to indicate that that measure involved the public authorities, thereby precluding the applicability of the principle of the private investor.
Ifølge EDF fastlægger retspraksis ingen formalia på området og kræver heller ikke en specifik forretningsplan i tilknytning til investeringen, kun objektiv og verificerbar dokumentation, der ligger forud for eller samtidig med den undersøgte foranstaltning.
From a substantive perspective, having regard to the criteria laid down by the General Court, the Commission noted that it was for France to duly establish the date of the documents provided and the evidence that they had been examined by the relevant ministers and officials and the Houses of Parliament before the contested decision was adopted.
Ifølge EDF var et sådant langsigtet perspektiv særlig relevant i EDF's tilfælde på grund af aktiviteternes kapitalintensitet og anlægsaktivernes lange levetid på 30 til 75 år i visse tilfælde.
In the absence of this information, however, it was in the exercise of its powers of taxation that France appeared to have reserved a more favourable tax treatment for the restructuring of the upper part of EDF's balance sheet, in relation to the reclassification of the grantor rights provided for in Article 4 of Act No 97-1026.
Ifølge EDF var det som aktionær og ikke som offentlig myndighed, at staten foretog en investering på baggrund af præcise prognoser og vurderinger af fremtiden, sådan som det også fremgår af de mange dokumenter fra daværende periode.
No specific budgetary provision earmarked this tax resource to EDF, just as the rules and checks relating to investments had not been implemented to provide a legal basis for the alleged investment.
Allerede i 1995 blev der således iværksat samarbejde mellem EDF og virksomhedens ressortministerier for at drage konsekvenserne af revisionsrettens udtalelse som nævnt i betragtning 26.
Likewise, in its extension decision, the Commission noted in the alternative that, even if the principle of the private investor in a market economy had been applicable, application of the principle resulted in the conclusion at that stage that a private investor would not have invested FRF 5,88 billion in the capital contribution to EDF in 1997.
Dette samarbejde gjaldt således navnlig omposteringerne på virksomhedens balance og kapitalens rentabilitet.
In the absence of information provided by the French authorities, it seemed excluded that a private shareholder under normal market conditions would have gone ahead with the alleged investment without previously examining objective and reliable studies, preferably carried out by an impartial independent investment adviser, rather than, for example, by the beneficiary enterprise, which stated, in particular, the return on capital invested, the return period on the investment and the inherent risks in absolute terms and in relation to the remuneration arrangements linked to such an investment.
Samarbejdet udmøntede sig i underskrivelsen den 8. april 1997 af serviceaftalen mellem staten og EDF for perioden 1997-2000 og i den samtidige fremsættelse, nemlig den 2. april 1997, af et lovforslag om forskellige bestemmelser af økonomisk og finansiel art, hvoraf artikel 45 var en gentagelse af bestemmelserne i artikel 4 i lov nr. 97-1026.
In that regard, the Commission added to the factors which a rational private investor would have examined before committing funds the uncertainty about the amount and the future course of the pension financing costs facing EDF in 1997, under its specific pension scheme, and the assessment that an investor would make at that time.
hensynet til at afhjælpe det betydelige underskud på EDF's balance ved at styrke virksomhedens egenkapital
Similar doubts had already been raised in the opening decision.
hensynet til at forbedre international sammenligning for at øge virksomhedens troværdighed i finanssektoren.
COMMENTS BY THIRD PARTIES
Endelig er det markedsøkonomiske investorprincip ifølge EDF ikke alene anvendeligt som følge af de nævnte hensyn, men i øvrigt også opfyldt i det foreliggende tilfælde, eftersom staten handlede, som en privat investor ville have gjort.
By letter dated 29 July 2013, EDF submitted its comments on the extension decision.
Efter EDF's mening drejede det sig ifølge Domstolen (præmis 78 og 89 i dommen) om at fastslå, om EDF kunne have opnået den samme fordel, som virksomheden fik ved hjælp af de statslige midler, på normale markedsvilkår, og om denne fordel på grund af sine virkninger kunne fordreje eller true med at fordreje konkurrencen.
EDF levelled three main criticisms at the arguments set out in that decision:
Det vil her atter fremgå af mange dokumenter fra den daværende periode, at staten faktisk undersøgte og beregnede rentabiliteten af sin investering, sådan som en eneaktionær ville have gjort med en investering i sin virksomhed i et langsigtet perspektiv.
the decision ignored the lessons of the judgment of the General Court and failed to recognise the true nature of the recapitalisation of EDF carried out by the state; (ii) the decision was excessively formalistic in that it wrongly postulated the need for a business plan linked to the investment, whereas the recapitalisation was the fruit of a lengthy reflection process, as attested by many documents from that period; and (iii) the decision argued, without any demonstration, that no investor in a situation as close as possible to that of the state would have made a comparable investment, contrary to the information provided by EDF in support of its observations.
De beløb, som EDF skulle betale til staten fra 1997 til 2000, blev således ansat af staten forud for indgåelsen af aftalen.
As the General Court had confirmed, the measure implemented by the state when it reclassified the grantor rights as capital contributions constituted a recapitalisation of EDF intended to correct the imbalance on EDF's balance sheet with view to the opening-up of the energy markets to competition.
I øvrigt nævnte EDF i sine bemærkninger fra juli 2013 en undersøgelse bestilt hos Oxera, hvis resultat endnu ikke forelå, da EDF fremsendte sine bemærkninger.
The letter from the Minister for Economic Affairs dated 22 December 1997 did not contain a tax decision that departed from the 1997 Act but served to point out the tax implications.