natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Licensaftale, punkt 7 (Ingen garantier): »Each party provides its materials and services to the other pursuant to this agreement »as is,« »with all faults« and without warranties of any kind, express, implied, statutory or otherwise, including any implied warranties of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, reasonable care, workmanlike effort, results, lack of viruses, [Konsulent 3] or completeness, all of which each party expressly disclaims, and each party assumes the entire risk as to the results and performance of those services and the materials.
Article 16(1) of Regulation (EU) 2015/1589 establishes an obligation on the Commission to order recovery of unlawful and incompatible aid.
There is no warranty of title or noninfringement of any intellectual property rights or any warranty against interference with either party's or any other entity's enjoyment of information provided to it relating to this agreement. «.
That provision also provides that the Member State concerned shall take all necessary measures to recover unlawful aid that is found to be incompatible.
Eksempelvis overtog LuxOpCo i februar 2011 den fulde kontrol med LoveFilm Group, herunder samme koncerns immaterielle aktiver (se Amazons brev af 4. maj 2015).
Commission Regulation (EC) No 794/2004 elaborates the methods to be used for the calculation of recovery interest.
Som en del af integrationen efter opkøbet (erhvervelse Q) besluttede Amazon at koncentrere alle »rettigheder til digitalt indhold« […] i LuxOpCo. […].
Finally, Article 16(3) of Regulation (EU) 2015/1589 states that ‘recovery shall be effected without delay and in accordance with the procedures under the national law of the Member State concerned, provided that they allow for the immediate an effective execution of the Commission decision’.
Licensaftalens punkt 3.2 fastsætter: »Third Party Materials, From time to time during the Term, AEU [LuxOpCo] may license or otherwise acquire rights to or ownership of third party materials, which AEU [LuxOpCo] may use in connection with the Licensed Purpose (»Third Party Materials«).
NEW AID
If AEU [LuxOpCo] acquires ownership of any Third Party Materials, then AEU [LuxOpCo] hereby grants Amazon EHT [LuxSCS] a royalty free and non-exclusive tight and license to use such Third Party Materials during the Term to the full extent that AEU [LuxOpCo] can use such Third Party Materials as the owner of the Third Party Material. «.
In accordance with Article 17 of Regulation (EU) 2015/1589, the power of the Commission to recover aid is subject to a limitation period of 10 years.
Amazons brev af 18. maj 2016. »Both LuxOpCo and ASE rely on the Intangibles in operating their businesses.
The limitation period begins on the day on which the unlawful aid is awarded to the beneficiary either as individual aid or as aid under an aid scheme.
Inventory risk management, pricing, fulfilment, management and third party registration on Amazon's marketplaces, to name a few, are automated to a very large extent and the required technology is licensed from LuxSCS.
Any action taken by the Commission or by a Member State, acting at the request of the Commission, with regard to the unlawful aid interrupts the limitation period.
As a result of this automation, these functions require limited involvement from LuxOpCo and ASE's employees beyond monitoring and management.«.
Each interruption starts time running afresh.
Licensaftale, afsnit 2.1 a) (Meddelelse af eksklusiv IP-licens).
The limitation period is suspended for as long as the decision of the Commission is the subject of proceedings pending before the Court of Justice.
Se fodnote 64.
Finally, any aid with regard to which the limitation period has expired is deemed to be existing aid.
Aftale om tjenesteydelser, punkt 3.1 (Udbyders brug).
Amazon argues that any aid granted under the contested tax ruling is existing aid, because the contested tax ruling is an individual measure granted to it more than 10 years before the Commission started its State aid investigation into that ruling.
Aftale om tjenesteydelser, punkt 3.2 (Selskabets ejendom).
The contested tax ruling was indeed issued more than 10 years before the Commission started its investigation, namely on 6 November 2003.
Licensaftalens punkt 4.1 (Løbetid).
However, contrary to what Amazon claims, that does not mean that all and any aid granted under it constitutes existing aid that cannot be recovered.
Licensaftalens punkt 4.2 (Omgående ophør ved meddelelse om ændring i kontrol eller væsentlig behæftelse).
In the present case, the aid granted as a result of the contested tax ruling was granted on an annual basis, at the moment when LuxOpCo had to pay its corporate income tax in Luxembourg.
Licensaftalens punkt 4.3 (Ophør efter manglende opfyldelse af kontraktlige forpligtelser).
That is because the purpose of the contested tax ruling was to enable LuxOpCo to determine, over a certain period of time, its annual corporate income tax liability in Luxembourg.
Luxembourgs brev af 21. november 2014, bilag 4.
That ruling endorses a transfer pricing arrangement that allows LuxOpCo to determine its transfer prices, which in turn determine its annual taxable profit.
Se betragtning 128 for definitioner af begreber anvendt i beregning af licensgebyret.
That amount of profit is then declared in its annual corporate income tax declaration, which Luxembourg has accepted each and every year during the relevant period.
Som følge af ændringen betyder »overskud fra driften i EU« indtægter i EU minus EU COGS og EU driftsomkostninger og, som aftalt mellem parterne fra tid til anden, visse udgifter til kostpris, som ikke er medtaget i driftsomkostningerne for AEU.
The aid is thus granted under the contested tax ruling every year that that declaration is accepted by the Luxembourg tax administration.
Se fodnote 84.
What this means for the present case is that only aid granted before 24 June 2004 constitutes existing aid, since the limitation period laid down by Article 17 of Regulation (EU) 2015/1589 was interrupted on 24 June 2014, the date on which the Commission sent a letter to Luxembourg requesting information on any rulings granted to Amazon.
Som forklaret i Amazons brev af 31. oktober 2003, s. 4: »Notwithstanding the tax transparency of LuxSCS, it would have been subject to municipal business tax (Article 2 MBTL) on its profits if these profits are derived by a permanent establishment situated in Luxembourg from the carrying out of a »commercial activity« as defined by Article 14-1 ITL. «.
As explained by Amazon, even though the contested tax ruling was obtained in 2003, LuxOpCo did not start to use the transfer pricing arrangement endorsed therein for the purposes of determining its annual corporate income tax liability in Luxembourg until 2006.
Dette brev samt Amazons brev af 31. oktober 2003 blev suppleret med yderligere oplysninger om omstruktureringen i Amazons breve til den luxembourgske skatteforvaltning af 5. december 2004, 14. april 2006 og 20. april 2006.
Consequently, there are no fiscal years before 24 June 2004 in which the ruling was used to assess LuxOpCo's annual taxable profit and the Luxembourg tax administration accepted a tax declaration based on that assessment.
Den luxembourgske skatteforvaltning bekræftede ved sine breve til Amazon af 23. december 2004 og 27, april 2006, at: »As the changes discussed in your letter of April 14, 2006 and in the letter of April 20, 2006 by Mr. […] from [Konsulent 1] will have no effect on the taxation of your group's companies, my letter of November 6, 2003 will remain in force.
In any event, the Commission recalls that by letter of 23 December 2004 the Luxembourg tax administration confirmed the continued validity of the transfer pricing arrangement endorsed by the contested tax ruling following a delay in the implementation of the restructuring of Amazon's European operations, for which that ruling was initially requested.
So, I have no objections to the content of the letters of April 14, 2006 and April 20, 2006 respectively.«
All aid granted to LuxOpCo and the Amazon group by way of the contested tax ruling therefore constitutes new aid.
Amazons brev af 23. oktober 2003, s. 5.
NO GENERAL PRINCIPLE OF LAW PREVENTS RECOVERY
Amazons brev af 23. oktober 2003, s. 6.
Article 16(1) of Regulation (EU) 2015/1589 provides that the Commission shall not require recovery of the aid if this would be contrary to a general principle of Union law.
TP-rapporten, jf. betragtning 4.
Luxembourg argues that the principles of legal certainty and legitimate expectations stand in the way of recovery in the present case, first, because the Commission is retroactively applying an allegedly new approach to transfer pricing and, second, because the Code of Conduct Group (Business Taxation) and the OECD Forum on Harmful Tax Practices had assured Luxembourg that its tax ruling practice based on Article 164(3) LIR and the Circular is consistent with the OECD Code of Conduct and the OECD TP Guidelines.
I Amazons brev af 31. oktober 2003 forklares det endvidere, at »LuxSCS bibeholder alle rettigheder og bærer enhver risiko forbundet med ejendomsretten til de immaterielle aktiver«.
The principle of legal certainty is a general principle of EU law that predicates the predictability of rules and their legal effects.
Amazons brev af 23. oktober 2003, s. 3-4.
According to the case law, the principle of legal certainty prevents the Commission from indefinitely delaying the exercise of its powers.
Ledelsen forventedes at tegne sig for 8-10 fuldtidsbeskæftigede medarbejdere og omfatte følgende stillinger: Europæisk generaldirektør, leder for Luxembourg, direktør for den fælleseuropæiske forsyningskæde, direktør for fælleseuropæisk driftsmæssig excellence, direktør for fælleseuropæiske tekniske operationer, direktør for informationsteknologi, økonomi- og finansdirektør, Europa, direktør for finansielle operationer, Europa.
The Court of Justice has also stated that the only grounds on which, in exceptional cases, that principle may be invoked, is when the Commission has manifestly failed to act and has clearly breached its duty of diligence in the exercise of its supervisory powers.
Amazons brev af 23. oktober 2003, s. 4.
However, when a measure has been granted without having been notified, the mere fact that there has been a delay by the Commission in ordering recovery does not suffice in itself to render that recovery decision unlawful under the legal certainty principle.
TP-rapporten s. 14.
In the present case, since the contested tax ruling was never notified to the Commission by Luxembourg, nor otherwise publicly available, the Commission could only have learnt of ts existence when Luxembourg responded to its request for information on 4 August 2014.
TP-rapporten s. 29.
The principle of legitimate expectations can be invoked by any person in a situation where an EU authority ‘has caused him to entertain expectations which are justified’.
TP-rapporten s. 20-21.
Important limitations apply to invoking that principle, however, as decided by the Court of Justice.
Amazons brev af 28. oktober 2015: »Meeting with the Case Team« s. 8.
First, the Court has stated that that principle cannot be invoked unless the person invoking it ‘has been given precise assurances by the administration’.
7 mio. USD det første år, og 8 mio. USD i det andet år af aftalen; i: Internt Amazon-dokument: Aftale mellem Amazon og [A], s. 155.
Second, Member States cannot invoke that principle in cases where they have failed to notify the aid measure to the Commission.
Spænder fra 7 mio. USD i andet år af aftalen til 35 mio. USD i det femte år; i: Internt Amazon-dokument: Aftale mellem Amazon og [A], s. 155.
Third, the Commission's alleged failure to act is irrelevant when an aid measure has not been notified to it and, consequently, the Commission's silence cannot be interpreted as an implicit authorisation of the measure that may give rise to legitimate expectations.
Indledningsvist 5 %, derefter faldende til 4 % i det fjerde og følgende år; i: Internt Amazon-dokument: Aftale mellem Amazon og [A], s. 157.
Consequently, since the Commission never gave precise assurances to Luxembourg that the contested tax ruling does not constitute aid and Luxembourg never notified the contested tax ruling to the Commission, Luxembourg cannot rely on the principle of legitimate expectations.
TP-rapporten s. 28.
Luxembourg's subsequent claim that the Commission adopted a novel approach for a finding of State aid to the present case cannot be accepted.
Amadeus-databasen er en database med økonomiske oplysninger om både offentlige og private selskaber på tværs af hele Europa.
First, in response to an argument made by a Member State that direct taxation fell under its fiscal autonomy, the Court of Justice explicitly acknowledged, in a judgment of 1974, the application of the State aid rules in the field of direct taxation.
Den vedligeholdelses af Bureau van Dijk, eller BvD, som er en udgiver af selskabsoplysninger og business intelligence.
Since a tax ruling is no more than an interpretation of the tax rules to a particular situation, upon which a taxpayer may rely to determine its tax burden in a particular Member State, the State aid rules necessarily apply to tax rulings as well, as explicitly acknowledged by the Commission in its 1998 Notice on the application of the State aid rules to measures relating to direct business taxation (‘the 1998 Notice’).
Skatterådgiveren begrænsede søgningen til følgende lande: Belgien, Danmark, Finland, Frankrig, Grækenland, Italien, Luxembourg, Nederlandene, Norge, Portugal, Schweiz, Spanien, Sverige, Tyskland og Østrig.
Second, the Commission adopted a series of decisions in 2002 to 2004 in which it concluded that several tax schemes in various Member States constituted State aid because they endorsed a method of assessment of taxable income for certain categories of undertaking that departed from a reliable approximation of an arm's length outcome or otherwise benefitted certain multinational group companies under the ordinary rules of corporate taxation.
Følgende nøgleord blev brugt som søgeord: Datamatisk, design, marketing, merchandising, programmering, promotion, tjenester, webdesign.
That a method of assessment of taxable income producing an outcome that diverges from the arm's length principle results in the grant of State aid for its beneficiary/-ies was explicitly endorsed by the Court of Justice in a 2006 judgment.
Algoriel, Askell, Decade, Seresco SA, Societe de Gestion de Terminaux Informatiques, Solutec og Sydelis.
Luxembourg further submits that it was explicitly confirmed at the Council (ECOFIN) meeting of 27 May 2011 that, in view of the adoption of the Circulars, Luxembourg's tax ruling practice should not be evaluated according to the Code of Conduct Group and that an agreement in a Code of Conduct Group meeting that ‘there [is] no need for the [Luxembourg tax measure on companies engaged in intra-group financing activities] to be assessed against the criteria of the Code of Conduct’ constitutes a precise assurance as to appropriateness of the general tax ruling practice of Luxembourg.
TP-rapportens bilag V.
However, those submissions cannot be accepted as substantiating a claim of either legal certainty or legitimate expectations.
TP-rapportens bilag V, s. 46.
First, the Code of Conduct and the State aid rules pursue different objectives: while the Code of Conduct aims at tackling harmful tax competition between Member States, the State aid rules seek to address distortions of competition that result from favourable treatment by Member States, also in the form of tax reductions, of certain undertakings.
TP-rapporten s. 31.
Second, the Code of Conduct is not a legally binding instrument.
TP-rapporten s. 32.
It is a forum of discussion for Member States on measures which have, or may have, a significant impact on the location of businesses within the Union.
TP-rapporten s. 34.
While the Code of Conduct group enjoys a certain margin of discretion, the Commission enjoys no discretion in determining whether a tax measure falls to be considered State aid, since that notion is an objective one.
På grundlag af LuxSCS' behandling som en skattemæssigt transparent enhed i Luxembourg, så anses royaltybetalinger fra LuxOpCo til LuxSCS ikke at være skattepligtig indkomst for LuxSCS i Luxembourg, men for dets partnere i USA.
Third, the Code of Conduct was adopted by the Council (ECOFIN), not the Commission, and therefore cannot bind the Commission in the exercise of its State aid competence.
Endvidere har Luxembourg med virkning fra 1. januar 2004 ikke opkrævet kildeskat på royaltyindtægter fra immaterielle aktiver fra ikke-bosiddende modtagere.
Fourth, the Code of Conduct considered the Circulars on intra-group financing in general, whereas this Decision examines a specific tax ruling granted in favour of a specific company not related to intra-group financing.
Da USA ikke betragter LuxSCS som skattemæssigt transparent, men snarere som en særskilt juridisk enhed hjemmehørende i Luxembourg, kan beskatningen af LuxSCS' partnere i USA udskydes på ubestemt tid, så længe intet af LuxSCS' overskud overføres til USA.
Consequently, an agreement in the Code of Conduct Group meeting can neither bind nor restrict the Commission's actions in exercising its powers which are conferred on it by the Treaty in the field of State aid.
Den forskellige skattemæssige behandling af LuxSCS i Luxembourg (skattemæssigt transparent) og i USA (skattemæssigt ikke-transparent) skyldes en såkaldt »hybrid mismatch«, dvs. en forskel i de luxembourgske og amerikanske skatteregler om enhedens kvalifikation.
The same is true for the agreements reached on 6 December 2011 in the OECD Forum, according to which ‘the following 10 regimes did not need to be examined further […] Luxembourg – Advance tax analysis for intra-group financing’.
Som forklaret i betragtning 127.
The OECD is not a Union institution, nor is the Union a member of that organisation, and its conclusions, which are non-binding, cannot bind the institutions of the Union.
Disse supporttjenester omfattede bl.a. generelle administrative, corporate og public relations, regnskabsføring og revision, budgettering, skat og juridisk bistand samt uddannelse og udvikling af medarbejdere.
Moreover, far from giving a precise assurance, the OECD Forum refrained from further examining the Luxembourg tax analysis for intra-group financing.
Amazons brev af 21. august 2015, s. 7-8.
It is therefore impossible to draw any kind of conclusions or inferences from this statement as regards the application of the State aid rules to the contested tax ruling, which is an individual transfer pricing ruling unrelated to intra-group financing.
[Konsulent 3] Rapport, 11. maj 2017, præambel p. 7.
Amazon similarly invokes the principle of legitimate expectations, arguing that the Commission's investigation was based on a novel approach to the State aid rules.
[Konsulent 3]-rapporten, 11. maj 2017, punkt 18 og 67, s. 8 og s. 30.
The Commission has already explained in Recital 626 why that claim is unfounded.
[Konsulent 3]-rapporten punkt 18.
For a claim of legitimate expectations to succeed, the expectation must arise from prior Commission action in the form of precise assurances.
Som forklaret i afsnit 20 i [Konsulent 3]-rapporten, »[t]he main difference between traditional retailers and online retailers lies in the product distribution channel used: Online retailers sell their products through a website and deliver them to customers using advanced information systems and complex logistics infrastructure without physical stores.
This means that the legitimate expectation must arise from a previous behaviour of the Commission that, for instance, had already adopted a decision on the same or identical aid scheme.
Their cost structure reflects the investments in the IT and in shipping and logistics infrastructure and technology; Traditional physical retailers distribute their products in stores, and bear the costs of renting the physical outlets, which are not borne by online retailers«.
Amazon did not refer to any such acts of the Commission, but instead claimed that ‘the application of State aid rules to individual tax rulings on transfer pricing has never been subject of any previous statement by the Commission’.
Rapport [Konsulent 3], 11. maj 2017, punkt 24-25, s. 11.
The Commission recalls in this regard that State aid is an objective notion, so that even if no decisions existed prior to 2015 that declared individual tax rulings as giving rise to State aid, that does not mean that such rulings cannot give rise to State aid.
Rapport [Konsulent 3], 11. maj 2017, punkt 29, s. 13.
In any event, the Commission has adopted a number of decisions declaring schemes deviating from the arm's length principle as giving rise to State aid and it has adopted a number of decisions declaring individual tax measures to constitute State aid.
Rapporten viser, at dette ville være Det Forenede Kongerige, Tyskland, Frankrig, Spanien og Italien.
Amazon also invokes the principle of equal treatment, arguing that Amazon would be the only undertaking of many subject to the same tax treatment which would have to repay illegal aid.
Rapport [Konsulent 3], 11. maj 2017, punkt 11, s. 5.
However, the Court has already considered that the fact that other undertakings are granted State aid, even competitors, is irrelevant for determining whether a particular measure constitutes State aid.
Rapport [Konsulent 3], 11. maj 2017, punkt 12, s. 5.
Since recovery is the logical consequence of the existence of unlawful aid, this must a fortiori apply to the repayment of the unlawful State aid.
Rapport [Konsulent 3], 11. maj 2017, punkt 77, s. 33-34.
In conclusion, no general principle of law prevents recovery in the present case.
Se Amazon.com Inc., årsrapport 2016, side 3: »We serve consumers through our retail websites and focus on selection, price, and convenience«.
METHODOLOGY FOR RECOVERY
Amazon tilbyder et bredt udvalg af forbrugs- og varige goder, der omfatter elektronik og almindelige varer samt medieprodukter såsom bøger, musik, video, spil og software, der er tilgængelige i både fysisk og digitalt format; Se Amazon.com Inc., årsrapport 2016, s. 68.
The obligation on a State to abolish unlawful aid regarded by the Commission as being incompatible with the internal market is designed to re-establish the previously existing competitive situation on the market.
Amazon Final Transcripts: [Vicedirektør for international detailhandel, Amazon Corporate LLC, USA, tidligere chef for europæisk detailvirksomhed, ansvarlig for alle detailoperationer i Europa, LuxOpCo, Luxembourg], 3. november 2014, punkt 427:18-23.
In this context, the Court of Justice has stated that that objective is attained once the recipient has repaid the amounts granted by way of unlawful aid, thus forfeiting the advantage which it has enjoyed over its competitors on the market, and the situation prior to the payment of the aid is restored.
Amazons briefing efter retssagen, s. 18, punkt 35 og Amazon Final Transcripts: [Vicedirektør for international detailhandel, Amazon Corporate LLC, USA, tidligere chef for europæisk detailvirksomhed, ansvarlig for alle detailoperationer i Europa, LuxOpCo, Luxembourg], 3. november 2014, punkt 427:18-23, Amazon Final Transcripts: [Vicedirektør for international detailhandel, Amazon Corporate LLC, USA, tidligere chef for europæisk detailvirksomhed, ansvarlig for alle detailoperationer i Europa, LuxOpCo, Luxembourg], 3. november 2014, punkt 427:18-23.
Rather, it is sufficient for the Commission's decision to include information enabling the addressee of the decision to work out that amount itself without overmuch difficulty .
Amazons briefing efter retssagen, s. 19, punkt 39-41.
Union law merely requires recovery of unlawful aid to restore the position to the status quo ante and that repayment be made in accordance with the rules of national law.
Sortimentet inkluderer også, at passende tilbehør er tilgængeligt.
In relation to unlawful State aid in the form of tax measures, the amount to be recovered should be calculated on the basis of a comparison between the tax actually paid and the amount which should have been paid if the generally applicable rule had been applied.