natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Med forbehold for konklusionen i den forudgående betragtning konkluderer Kommissionen yderligere, at selv hvis referencesystemet begrænses til artikel 164, stk. 3, LIR, og kun virksomheder tilhørende en multinational koncern kan betragtes som værende i en lignende faktuel og juridisk situation, sådan som Luxembourg og Amazon hævder, bør den anfægtede skatteafgørelse også anses som fordelagtig for LuxOpCo sammenlignet med disse skatteydere.
The TNMM is considered as a well-suited method to test the arm's length remuneration of the party which does not make any unique or valuable contributions to the transaction subject to the transfer pricing analysis.
I løbet af den periode, hvor den anfægtede skatteafgørelse var gældende, blev artikel 164, stk. 3, LIR anset som at fastlægge armslængdeprincippet i henhold til Luxembourgs skattelovgivning.
For the transfer pricing arrangement endorsed by the contested tax ruling, LuxOpCo was selected as the tested party in the application of the TNMM.
I medfør af denne bestemmelse må virksomheder tilhørende en multinational koncern, der handler med associerede virksomheder, bestemme deres transferpriser i henhold til dette princip.
The TP Report justifies that choice by arguing that LuxOpCo performs the least complex functions in its relationship with LuxSCS on the grounds that, contrary to LuxSCS, it does not own valuable IP and does not incur meaningful business risks in the performance of its routine activities.
Som vist i sektion 9.2 skaber ordningen for fastsættelse af transferpris endosseret af den anfægtede skatteafgørelse en skattepligtig indkomst for LuxOpCo, som ikke afspejler priser forhandlet i armslængde på markedet.
That line of reasoning demonstrates confusion between the complexity of assets held and the complexity of functions performed by the parties to the intra-group transaction being priced.
Den nedbringer derfor LuxOpCos selskabsskatlige ansvar i Luxembourg sammenlignet med virksomheder tilhørende en multinational koncern, som bestemmer deres transferpriser i overensstemmelse med artikel 164, stk. 3, LIR.
As explained in Recital 430, there is no basis for the assumption that an associated group company that licenses an intangible asset to another group company performs more complex functions than that company merely because it legally owns a complex asset.
I lyset af ovennævnte konkluderer Kommissionen, at den fordel, der identificeres i sektion 9.2, er af selektiv karakter, fordi den favoriserer Amazon sammenlignet med andre selskabsskatteydere tilhørende en multinational koncern, der indgår i koncerninterne handler, og som i kraft af artikel 164, stk. 3, LIR skal estimere priserne for deres koncerninterne transaktioner på en måde, som afspejler priser forhandlet af uafhængige parter i armslænge på markedet.
For transfer pricing purposes, legal ownership of an intangible in itself does not confer any right to ultimately retain the returns derived from the exploitation of that intangible.
MANGLENDE BEGRUNDELSE
The remuneration of a party to an intra-group transaction depends on the functions it performs, the assets it uses, and the risks it assumes, on the one hand, and on the contributions made by the other related parties to the transaction through their functions performed, assets used, and risks assumed, on the other.
Hverken Luxembourg eller Amazon har fremlagt nogen mulig begrundelse for den fordelagtige behandling, som den anfægtede skatteafgørelse medførte for LuxOpCo.
As explained in Section 9.2.1.1.3, any risks that might have been contractually attributed to LuxSCS, which were in fact of a very limited nature due to the License Agreement, does not correspond to the actual conduct of the parties.
Kommissionen minder i den forbindelse om, at bevisbyrden for en sådan begrundelse påhviler medlemsstaten.
In the present case, the Luxembourg tax administration should not have accepted Amazon's claim that the mere legal ownership of the Intangibles constitutes a ‘unique contribution’ for which LuxSCS should receive a remuneration consisting of almost all profits derived from all LuxOpCo's business activities.
Under alle omstændigheder har Kommissionen ikke været i stand til at identificere nogen mulig grund, som kan retfærdiggøre den fordelagtige behandling, som LuxOpCo opnår som følge af den foranstaltning, som kunne siges at bero direkte på referencesystemets direkte, grundlæggende eller ledende principper, eller som er et resultat af indbyggede mekanismer, der er nødvendige for, at systemet fungerer og er effektivt, uanset om dette referencesystem er det almindelige selskabsskattesystem i Luxembourg, som Kommissionen lægger til grund, eller artikel 164, stk. 3, LIR, som Luxembourg og Amazon hævder.
Rather, it should have required a functional analysis demonstrating that LuxSCS performs unique and valuable functions in relation to that asset, which was entirely missing from the TP Report.
KONKLUSION VEDRØRENDE SELEKTIVITET
While it is undisputed that LuxOpCo should not receive the exclusive and irrevocable right to use and sublicense the Intangibles without reimbursing LuxSCS for the costs the latter bears in relation to the Buy-In Agreement and the CSA, whether LuxSCS should be remunerated in excess of that amount depends on the functions performed by LuxSCS and LuxOpCo respectively in relation to the Intangibles.
I lyset af ovenstående konkluderer Kommissionen, at den fordel, der identificeres i sektion 9.2, som den anfægtede skatteafgørelsen tildeler LuxOpCo, er af selektiv karakter.
Although it was the legal owner of the Intangibles during the relevant period, the functional analysis undertaken in Section 9.2.1.1 demonstrates that LuxSCS performed no active and critical functions in relation to the development, enhancement, management, or exploitation thereof which would justify attributing to it almost all of the profit generated by LuxOpCo in the operation of Amazon's European retail and service business.
KONKLUSION VEDRØRENDE EKSISTENSEN AF STATSSTØTTE
LuxSCS merely held the Intangibles for the purpose of the European operations carried out through the EU websites (i.e. the business activities carried out by LuxOpCo).
Eftersom den anfægtede skatteafgørelse opfylder alle betingelserne i traktatens artikel 107, stk. 1« må den betragtes som statsstøtte i den bestemmelses forstand.
The functional analysis undertaken in Section 9.2.1.2 shows that all the effective legal rights related to the development, enhancement, management and exploitation of the Intangibles in the European territory had been exclusively and irrevocably granted to LuxOpCo for the entire lifetime thereof.
Den støtte resulterer i en nedsættelse af afgifter, som normalt burde pålægges LuxOpCo i forbindelse med deres virksomhedsdrift, og den bør derfor betragtes som en tildeling af driftsstøtte til LuxOpCo.
Moreover, it was LuxOpCo, with the support of the EU Local Affiliates , that actually carried out all the relevant functions, used the relevant assets and assumed all relevant risks in relation not only to the exploitation of the Intangibles, but also to their development, enhancement, management and exploitation.
STØTTEMODTAGER
LuxOpCo also performed headquarter functions and a range of unique and valuables functions relevant to the key values drivers of Amazon's business, namely selection, price and convenience.
Kommissionen anser den anfægtede skatteafgørelse som en tildeling af en selektiv fordel til LuxOpCo inden for betydningen af traktatens artikel 107, stk. 1, eftersom den medfører en nedbringelse af enhedens skattepligtige overskud og dermed dens selskabsskatlige ansvar i Luxembourg.
All this was apparent from the terms of the License Agreement, as well as from the functional analysis in the TP Report, which states that LuxSCS's only functions were the ones of a passive intangible holding company administering the intellectual property held by it.
Kommissionen bemærker sig, at LuxOpCo udgør en del af en multinational koncern, nemlig Amazon-koncernen.
Notwithstanding that the ruling request and the TP Report explained that LuxSCS was expected to operate as an intangibles holding company and LuxOpCo was expected to act as the principal operator of the European operations, none of these functions were taken into account by the Luxembourg tax administration when it scrutinised that request and accepted the proposed transfer pricing arrangement.
Ved anvendelsen af statsstøttereglerne kan særskilte retlige enheder anses for at udgøre én økonomisk enhed.
Rather, that administration relied on Amazon's unsubstantiated and inaccurate claim that LuxSCS would perform unique and valuable functions in relation to the Intangibles, whereas LuxOpCo would perform solely ‘routine’ management functions incurring limited risks.
Denne økonomiske enhed betragtes derefter som den relevante virksomhed, der drager fordel af støtten.
However, in light of the functional analyses undertaken in Sections 9.2.1.1 and 9.2.1.2, it is LuxSCS and not LuxOpCo that is the less complex entity.
Som domstolen tidligere har fastholdt, »[s]kal udtrykket »virksomhed« i konkurrencelovgivningen forstås som betegnelsen for en økonomisk enhed […] selv hvis denne økonomiske enhed ifølge loven består af flere personer, naturlige eller juridiske«.
Consequently, LuxSCS should have been selected as the tested party for the application of the TNMM for the purposes of pricing the License Agreement.
For at fastslå, hvorvidt flere enheder danner en økonomisk enhed, ser domstolen på eksistensen af en styrende aktie eller funktionelle, økonomiske eller organiske sammenhænge.
The profit level indicator
I den aktuelle sag blev LuxOpCo fuldstændigt styret af LuxSCS i den relevante periode, og LuxSCS blev til gengæld styret af amerikansk baserede virksomheder i Amazon-koncernen.
In applying the TNMM, the choice of profit level indicator must reflect the value of the functions performed by the tested party in the controlled transaction, taking into account the assets used and the risks assumed by it, be based on objective data, and be capable of being measured in a reasonably reliable and consistent manner.
Som det desuden fremgår tydeligt i afgørelsesanmodningen, var det Amazon-koncernen, styret af Amazon.com, Inc., som traf beslutningen om at stifte LuxOpCo i Luxembourg.
In applying the TNMM, the net profit is generally weighted to costs for manufacturing and service activities, to sales for sales activities, and to assets for asset-intensive activities .
Fastsættelse af transferpris er desuden karakteriseret ved, at den påvirker mere end én koncern, fordi et fald i overskud i én virksomhed normalt øger overskuddet hos dens genpart.
Since LuxSCS does not record any sales, nor assume risks in relation to the Intangibles, the costs it incurs directly are the most reliable indicator of the value of the limited functions it performs (taking into account the assets used and risks assumed).
I den aktuelle sag påvirker bestemmelsen af LuxOpCos skattepligtige overskud i Luxembourg royaltybetalingerne til LuxSCS, eftersom royaltyniveauet svarer til alt overskud registreret af LuxOpCo over [4-6] % af deres driftsudgifter eller 0,55 % af omsætningen som aftalt i skatteafgørelsen.
The relevant profit level indicator in this case is therefore a mark-up on total relevant costs.
Nedsættelsen af LuxOpCos skatteansvar i Luxembourg gavner derfor ikke kun LuxOpCo, men også LuxSCS.
As regards the determination of the appropriate cost base to which a mark-up should be applied in the present case, LuxSCS did not perform any value-adding functions in relation to the development, enhancement, management, or exploitation of the Intangibles, nor did it use any assets or assume any substantial risks in this respect.
Eftersom overskud tilskrevet LuxSCS ikke var omfattet af beskatning i Luxembourg, men i bedste fald underlagt udskudt beskatning, hvis og når den fordeles ud til deres partnere i USA, tildeler den anfægtede skatteafgørelse desuden støtte til Amazon-koncernen som helhed.
It merely fulfilled an intermediary function, passing on the Buy-In and CSA Costs to LuxOpCo and transferring a portion of the royalty payments (the License Fee) it receives from LuxOpCo under the License Agreement to A9 and ATI in the amount of those costs.
Enhver fordelagtig skattemæssig behandling, som tildeles LuxOpCo af skattemyndigheden i Luxembourg, gavner derfor ikke kun LuxSCS, men hele Amazon-koncernen ved at give yderligere finansielle ressourcer til hele koncernen.
Moreover, LuxSCS was only entitled to the benefits of the CSA because LuxOpCo performed the functions and assumed the risks assigned to LuxSCS under that agreement during the relevant period by way of the License Agreement.
Til trods for det faktum, at denne koncern er organiseret i forskellige juridiske personligheder, og at den anfægtede skatteafgørelse omhandler den skattemæssige behandling af LuxOpCo og LuxSCS, skal koncernen derfor betragtes som én økonomisk enhed, som drager fordel af den anfægtede støtteforanstaltning.
Any remuneration of LuxSCS under the Licencing Agreement should therefore reflect that those contributions were provided by LuxOpCo .
STØTTENS FORENELIGHED
Despite what Amazon claims, the License Fee, as endorsed by the contested ruling, was not reduced corresponding to the functions of development, enhancement, management and exploitation of the Intangibles carried out by LuxOpCo.
Statsstøtte kan betragtes som forenelig med det indre marked, hvis den falder ind under en af kategorierne i traktatens artikel 107, stk. 2, og den kan betragtes som forenelig med det indre marked, hvis Kommissionen vurderer, at den hører ind under en af kategorierne i traktatens artikel 107, stk. 3.
Paragraph 3.1 of the License Agreement, which arranges for LuxOpCo to provide corporate services to LuxSCS, explicitly stipulates in this regard that ‘the parties agree that the License Fee set forth in exhibit A shall be the sole consideration for the licenses granted and services provided under this Agreement’.
Det er imidlertid den støtteydende medlemsstat, der bærer bevisbyrden for, at statsstøtte er forenelig med det indre marked efter traktatens artikel 107, stk. 2, eller artikel 107, stk. 3.
In fact, LuxSCS incurred no direct or indirect costs related to the Intangibles, with the exception of some limited costs related to the administration of its legal ownership of the Intangibles.
Luxembourg har ikke påberåbt sig nogen grund til, at den statsstøtte, der er ydet gennem den anfægtede afgørelse, skulle kunne findes forenelig efter nogen af disse bestemmelser.
Accordingly, the Buy-In and CSA Costs should be excluded from the cost base as pass through costs, i.e. no mark-up should be applied on those costs when determining LuxSCS's arm's length remuneration under the License Agreement.
Som forklaret i betragtning 606 udgør støtten tildelt af den anfægtede skatteafgørelse desuden driftsstøtte.
Since LuxSCS does not carry out any functions, use any assets or assume any risks in relation to the development, enhancement, management, and exploitation of the Intangibles, an independent party would not be expected to pay LuxSCS a mark-up on those costs.
Som hovedregel vil en sådan støtte normalt ikke kunne betragtes som forenelig med det indre marked efter traktatens artikel 107, stk. 3, idet den ikke fremmer udviklingen af visse erhvervsgrene eller økonomiske regioner, ej heller er de skattemæssige fordele tidsbegrænsede, faldende eller i proportion med, hvad der er nødvendigt for at afhjælpe et konkret markedssvigt på de berørte områder.
Similarly, the costs related to the intercompany sale of inventory in 2006 should be excluded from the cost base as this seems to be a one-off cost that does not relate to the provision of the Intangibles but to the restructuring of the European operations, where LuxSCS was re-organising the activities of its subsidiaries.
Som følge heraf er statsstøtten, der tildeles LuxOpCo og Amazon-koncernen af Luxembourg, ikke forenelig med det indre marked.
That can be qualified as a shareholder activity and should not be subject to any mark-up .
STØTTENS ULOVLIGHED
As regards the functions performed by LuxSCS during the relevant period, the general administrative services described in Recital 429 were acquired externally and did not entail any substantial risks.
I henhold til traktatens artikel 108, stk. 3, er medlemsstaterne forpligtet til at underrette Kommissionen om eventuelle planer om at yde støtte (anmeldelsespligt), og de må ikke iværksætte de foreslåede støtteforanstaltninger, før Kommissionen har truffet en endelig afgørelse om den pågældende støtte (standstill-forpligtelsen).
Those services can be delineated with reference to the costs directly incurred due to them.
Kommissionen bemærker, at Luxembourg ikke underrettede Kommissionen om eventuelle planer om at yde den anfægtede støtte og heller ikke overholdt standstill-forpligtelsen, der er fastsat i traktatens artikel 108, stk. 3.
Those costs related to the share of the Luxembourg costs allocated to LuxSCS for the administration of its legal ownership of the Intangibles, such as certain costs for maintaining that legal ownership.
Derfor indebærer den pågældende skatteafgørelse i overensstemmelse med artikel 1, litra f), i forordning (EU) 2015/1589 ulovlig statsstøtte ydet i strid med traktatens artikel 108, stk. 3.
Although no evidence was provided showing that LuxSCS actually took any active and critical decisions in relation to the protection of the Intangibles in Europe, the responsibility for which was in fact transferred to LuxOpCo, the Commission can nevertheless accept that those costs are included in the cost base for the application of the TNMM, so long as they represent actual functions carried out by LuxSCS.
TILBAGESØGNING
Those costs would then appear to relate to then maintenance of LuxSCS's legal ownership of the Intangibles in Europe.
TILBAGESØGNINGSPLIGTEN
Consequently, in addition to the re-charge of the pass through costs it bore in relation to the Buy-In Agreement and the CSA (i.e. the Buy-In and CSA Costs), LuxSCS should be remunerated with a mark-up on a cost-base consisting solely of the costs incurred for the external services acquired to maintain its legal ownership of the Intangibles, as described in Recital 429, to the extent that those costs actually represents actual functions carried out by LuxSCS.
I henhold til artikel 16, stk. 1, i forordning (EU) 2015/1589 skal Kommissionen kræve ulovlig støtte, der er uforenelig med det indre marked, tilbagebetalt.
That level of remuneration ensures an outcome in line with the arm's length principle since it appropriately reflects LuxSCS's contributions to the License Agreement.
Bestemmelsen fastsætter endvidere, at den pågældende medlemsstat skal træffe alle nødvendige foranstaltninger til at tilbagesøge ulovlig støtte, som er fundet uforenelig.
The determination of an appropriate mark-up
Det fastsættes i artikel 16, stk. 2, i forordning (EU) 2015/1589, at støtten skal tilbagebetales med renter fra det tidspunkt, hvor den ulovlige støtte var til støttemodtagerens rådighed, og indtil den tilbagebetales.
Determining an appropriate mark-up to apply to the selected profit level indicator normally requires a comparability analysis.
Kommissionens forordning (EF) nr. 794/2004 uddyber de metoder, der skal benyttes til beregning af renten på det tilbagebetalte.
Such an analysis entails a comparison of the controlled transaction with a comparable uncontrolled transaction or transactions.
Endelig angiver artikel 16, stk. 3, i forordning (EU) 2015/1589, at »tilbagebetaling skal ske uden forsinkelse og i henhold til procedurerne i den pågældende medlemsstats nationale lovgivning, såfremt de tillader øjeblikkelig og effektiv fuldbyrdelse af Kommissionens beslutning«.
Transactions are considered comparable if none of the differences between them could materially affect the factor being examined in the methodology (e.g. price or margin), or if reasonably accurate adjustments can be made to eliminate the material effects of any such differences.
NY STØTTE
In the present case, it is not possible to perform a reliable comparability analysis.
I henhold til artikel 17 i forordning (EU) 2015/1589 forældes Kommissionens beføjelser til at kræve tilbagebetaling af støtte efter ti år.
The comparables provided in the TP Report are not relevant in this respect, since those relate to companies which were active in data processing, database activities, other computer related activities, market research and public opinion polling, business and management consultancy activities and advertising, and none of those services are performed by LuxSCS.
Forældelsesfristen løber fra det tidspunkt, hvor den ulovlige støtte tilkendes støttemodtageren, enten som individuel støtte eller under en støtteordning.
To perform a reliable comparability analysis in the present case, relevant uncontrolled comparables providing services similar to the general administrative services provided by LuxSCS under the License Agreement would need to be identified.
Enhver foranstaltning, der træffes af Kommissionen eller af en medlemsstat efter opfordring fra Kommissionen angående den ulovlige støtte, afbryder denne frist.
However, a sub-license agreement comparable to the License Agreement is hard to conceive between independent parties.
Efter hver afbrydelse begynder forældelsesfristen forfra.
That would require the identification of independent companies that acquired an asset and undertook to perform certain functions and assume certain associated risks in relation to the entity from which it acquired the asset, transferred those functions and risks to another independent company, and was left with limited administrative functions to protect its ownership interest in the IP license.
Forældelsesfristen suspenderes i det tidsrum, hvor Kommissionens afgørelse er genstand for en verserende sag for Den Europæiske Unions Domstol.
For the transactions to be comparable, the independent companies would also have to carry out their businesses under similar economic circumstances and with business strategies similar to that pursued by the parties to the License Agreement.
Enhver støtte, for hvilken forældelsesfristen er udløbet, anses for at være eksisterende støtte.
Finally, an adjustment would have to be made to any comparables included in a transfer pricing analysis to exclude pass-through costs incurred by those comparables from the cost base to which the mark-up should not be applied.
Amazon hævder, at enhver støtte, der er tildelt under den anfægtede skatteafgørelse, er eksisterende støtte, fordi den anfægtede skatteafgørelse er en individuel foranstaltning, som er blevet dem tildelt mere end ti år før, Kommissionen påbegyndte sin statsstøtteundersøgelse af afgørelsen.
Such comparables simply do not exist.
I den aktuelle sag blev den støtte, der var tildelt som et resultat af den anfægtede skatteafgørelse, tildelt på årlig basis på det tidspunkt, hvor LuxOpCo skulle betale selskabsskat i Luxembourg.
It is therefore not possible to conduct a comparability analysis in the present case without making significant and potentially random adjustments which would alter the reliability of that analysis.
Dette skyldes, at formålet med den anfægtede skatteafgørelse var at give LuxOpCo mulighed for over en vis periode at fastlægge deres årlige selskabsskatlige ansvar i Luxembourg.
Consequently, the Commission has refrained from performing a comparability analysis for the purposes of determining the level of a mark-up applicable to the functions actually performed by LuxSCS.
Afgørelsen godkender en ordning for fastsættelse af transferpris, som giver LuxOpCo mulighed for at fastlægge deres transferpriser, hvilket til gengæld bestemmer deres årlige skattepligtige overskud.
Instead, the Commission relies on the conclusion in the 2010 JTPF Report according to which a mark-up for low-added intra-group services in the range of 3 % to 10 % was observed by the national tax administrations of the Member States participating in the JTPF.
Dette overskudsbeløb erklæres dernæst i deres årlige selskabsskatteangivelse, som Luxembourg har accepteret hvert eneste år i den relevante periode.
According to that Report, the mark-up most often observed in practice was 5 % on the costs of providing such services.