natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
En anden mulighed ville være at gøre kommunerne generelt momspligtige.
Another possible measure would be to make the municipalities subject to VAT in general.
Rattsø-komitéen valgte ikke at udvide kommunernes ret til at fradrage indgående moms, da det ville ødelægge momsens karakter af generel afgift.
The Rattsø Committee did not choose to extend the municipalities’ right to deduct input VAT because this measure would imply a disruption to VAT as a general tax.
Der blev også taget hensyn til, at en sådan foranstaltning kunne skabe et pres fra andre grupper.
It was also taken into consideration that this measure could create pressure from other groups.
Rattsø-komiteen valgte heller ikke at gøre kommunerne generelt momspligtige.
Nor did the Rattsø Committee choose to make the municipalities subject to VAT in general.
Den fremhævede i den forbindelse bl.a., at momsberegningsgrundlaget ikke er tilstrækkeligt, fordi mange kommunale tjenester er gratis: »Inden for momssystemets rammer vil det være muligt at udvide kommunernes fradragsret eller gøre dem generelt momspligtige.
Among other factors, the Committee pointed out that because many municipal services are performed free of charge, there is a lack of calculation basis for the VAT: ‘Extension of the municipalities rights to deduction and making the municipalities subject to VAT in general would both be solutions within the VAT system.
Men formålet hermed — at mindske den konkurrencefordrejning, momssystemet medfører — ville imidlertid være nøjagtigt det samme som ved momskompensationsordningen.
The motive of these measures, to mitigate the distortion of competition resulting from the VAT system, would, however, be exactly the same as to that of the VAT compensation scheme.
I økonomisk forstand er der desuden ingen forskel mellem momskompensationsordningen og en udvidelse af kommunernes ret til at fradrage indgående moms.
Moreover, there is in an economic sense no difference between the compensation scheme and extending the municipalities right to deduct input tax.
Ministeriet finder derfor, at udformningen af momskompensationsordningen i sig selv ikke har den store betydning.«
Thus, the Ministry believes that in itself the framing of the VAT compensation scheme can be of no consequence.’
Handelspåvirkning
Effect on trade
De norske myndigheder kritiserede Tilsynsmyndighedens vurdering af samhandelspåvirkningskriteriet.
The Norwegian authorities criticised the Authority's assessment of the ‘effect on trade’ criteria.
»Via momskompensationsordningen får kommunerne primært refunderet den indgående moms af varer og tjenester købt til deres kommunale virksomhed.
‘Through the VAT compensation scheme the municipalities are primarily granted refund of input tax on goods and services purchased for their mandatory activities.
Kommunerne er ved lov blevet pålagt at udføre visse opgaver.
By law the municipalities are imposed to perform certain services.
Det gælder især på undervisningsområdet, sundhedsområdet og det sociale område.
This is specially the case on the education, health and social area.
I sundhedssektoren sorterer bl.a. praktiserende læger, sygeplejersker, jordemødre og plejehjem under kommunernes opgaver.
For instance, in the health sector the municipalities, among other things, are instructed to provide for general practitioner services, nursing services, midwife services and nursing home services.
I den sociale sektor har kommunerne pligt til at yde praktisk og økonomisk støtte til borgerne, f.eks. inden for socialt boligbyggeri.«
In the social sector the municipalities are instructed to provide for practical and economic support to the receivers, e.g. social housing.’
»Efter momskompensationslovens §§ 2 og 3 kan der tillige ydes momskompensation til kommuner, der udfører aktiviteter, de ikke har fået pålagt at udføre ved lov.
‘Pursuant to Article 2 and 3 of the VAT Compensation Act, VAT compensation may also be granted to municipalities which carry out non-mandatory activities.
Ud over den særlige undervisning, de kommunale fagskoler tilbyder, har ministeriet imidlertid ikke kendskab til nogen områder uden for momssystemets anvendelsesområde, hvor der kan være tvivl om, hvorvidt modtagere af momskompensationer udøver deres aktiviteter i konkurrence med andre virksomheder inden for EØS.«
Besides the special training performed by the topical county municipal schools, the Ministry does, however, not know of any areas outside the scope of the VAT system where it is questioned whether the recipients of VAT compensation perform their services in competition with other undertakings within the EEA.’
De norske myndigheder fandt derfor, at i de sektorer, der er undtaget fra momsloven, ville der være meget få virksomheder i europæiske nabolande, der ville udøve virksomhed i konkurrence med norske virksomheder omfattet af momskompensationsloven.
The Norwegian authorities consequently believed that in sectors which are exempted from the scope of application of the VAT Act, very few undertakings established in neighbouring European countries would provide services in competition with Norwegian undertakings covered by the VAT Compensation Act.
Desuden spiller faktorer såsom den fysiske afstand til tjenesteudbyderen, sprogproblemer og andre former for kulturel tilknytning en afgørende rolle for valg af tjenesteudbyder.
Moreover, circumstances such as physical distance to the service provider, language difficulties and other forms of cultural attachment are decisive when a service provider is chosen.
De norske myndigheder fandt, at for at få et korrekt billede af momskompensationsordningen i relation til kriterierne i EØS-aftalens artikel 61, stk. 1, måtte man også tage i betragtning, at der inden for de momsfritagne sektorer kun er en ganske marginal konkurrence mellem norske virksomheder og andre virksomheder i EØS.
The Norwegian authorities considered that in order to perform a true assessment of the VAT compensation scheme in relation to the criteria set out in Article 61(1) of the EEA Agreement, it should be relevant that the competition between Norwegian undertakings and other undertakings in the EEA on sectors exempted from the application of VAT is quite marginal.
De norske myndigheder fandt derfor, at den momskompensation, der ydes til momsfritagne sektorer, ikke kan anses for at kunne påvirke samhandelen mellem de kontraherende parter i EØS-aftalen.
Thus, the Norwegian authorities believed that VAT compensation granted to undertakings in sectors exempted from the application of VAT cannot be deemed as capable of affecting trade between the Contracting Parties to the EEA Agreement.
De norske myndigheder henviste til flere EU-lande, der har indført momskompensationsordninger for kommunernes momsudgifter i forbindelse med deres momsbelagte eller momsfritagne aktiviteter.
The Norwegian authorities referred to several EU Member States which have introduced refund schemes for the VAT costs on non-taxable or tax-exempt activities for local governments.
I Sverige, Danmark, Finland, Nederlandene og Det Forenede Kongerige er der indført forskellige ordninger, der indebærer en momskompensation til kommunerne, med det formål at undgå en fordrejning af de offentlige myndigheders valg mellem egenproduktion og outsourcing af offentlige tjenester.
In Sweden, Denmark, Finland, the Netherlands and the United Kingdom different schemes which provide for refunds of VAT to local governments have been established to eliminate distortions in the decision making of public authorities between public provision and contracting out of public services.
Også i Frankrig, Luxembourg, Østrig og Portugal findes der forskellige momsrefusionsordninger af stort set samme art.
Various VAT refund systems of a broadly similar nature are also established in France, Luxembourg, Austria and Portugal.
De norske myndigheder citerede desuden den tidligere kommissær Bolkenstein.
Further, the Norwegian authorities quoted former Commissioner Mr Bolkestein.
I et brev af 1. februar 2000 til Michel Hansenne (Belgien), der havde rettet en forespørgsel til Europa-Parlamentet om, hvorvidt den britiske momskompensationsordning var i overensstemmelse med sjette momsdirektiv, udtalte kommissær Bolkenstein, at en momskompensationsordning »ikke er i strid med sjette momsdirektiv«, eftersom »den indebærer en rent finansiel transaktion mellem forskellige offentlige organer og indgår som led i det pågældende lands politik for finansiering af det offentlige«.
In a letter of 1 February 2000 to Michel Hansenne (Belgium), who had asked the European Parliament whether the VAT compensation scheme in the United Kingdom was in compliance with the sixth VAT Directive, Mr Bolkestein stated that a VAT compensation scheme ‘does not conflict with the sixth VAT Directive’ since ‘it entails a purely financial operation between different public bodies and is governed by the respective national policy for the financing of public authorities’.
Kommissær Bolkestein omtalte også »en mulig ordning, hvor den irske regering vil yde tilskud til irske velgørende foreninger svarende til den ikke-fradragsberettigede indgående moms«.
Mr Bolkestein also commented on ‘a possible scheme whereby the Irish Government would give a subsidy to Irish charities of an amount equivalent to the non-deductive VAT that they had incurred’.
Han udtalte, at »ydelsen af statstilskud ikke i sig selv er i strid med Den Europæiske Unions momsregler«.
He stated that ‘the granting of government subsidies is in itself not contrary to the European Union VAT law’.
De norske myndigheder indrømmede, at ingen af disse citater direkte berørte statsstøttereglerne.
The Norwegian authorities admitted that none of these quotations directly addressed the State aid rules.
Men efter deres opfattelse fremgår det af dem, at momskompensationsordninger ikke anses for at være i strid med sjette momsdirektiv.
However, in their opinion, it appears from these quotations that the VAT compensation schemes are not deemed to be in conflict with the sixth VAT Directive.
Efter deres opfattelse betyder det, at momskompensationsordninger stemmer overens med selve momssystemets karakter og forvaltning.
In their view, this reflects the fact that VAT compensation schemes are in line with the nature and logic of the VAT system itself.
Statsstøtte
The presence of State aid
I EØS-aftalens artikel 61, stk. 1, fastsættes det:
Article 61(1) of the EEA Agreement reads as follows:
»Bortset fra de i denne aftale hjemlede undtagelser er støtte, som ydes af EF-medlemsstater, EFTA-stater eller ved hjælp af statsmidler under enhver tænkelig form, og som fordrejer eller truer med at fordreje konkurrencevilkårene ved at begunstige visse virksomheder eller visse produktioner, uforenelige med denne aftale i det omfang, den påvirker samhandelen mellem de kontraherende parter.«
‘Save as otherwise provided in this Agreement, any aid granted by EC Member States, EFTA States or through State resources in any form whatsoever which distorts or threatens to distort competition by favouring certain undertakings or the production of certain goods shall, in so far as it affects trade between Contracting Parties, be incompatible with the functioning of this Agreement.’
Der er en ting, Tilsynsmyndigheden først ønsker at slå fast i relation til denne vurdering.
The Authority would like to make a preliminary remark regarding the scope of the current assessment.
I denne beslutning tages der ikke stilling til de norske myndigheders beslutning om at fritage visse former for omsætning fra momslovens anvendelsesområde.
This Decision does not address the decision of the Norwegian authorities to exempt certain transactions from the scope of the application of the VAT Act.
Den drejer sig udelukkende om kompensationen for den indgående moms, som nogle af de virksomheder, som falder ind under momskompensationslovens anvendelsesområder, betaler.
It only concerns the compensation for input tax paid by certain persons falling within the scope of the VAT Compensation Act.
Desuden vil Tilsynsmyndigheden også gerne understrege tre bemærkninger, den allerede fremførte i beslutning nr. 225/06/COL:
Further, the Authority would also like to stress three remarks it already made in Decision No 225/06/COL:
For det første er en EFTA-stats skattesystem ikke omfattet af EØS-aftalen.
Firstly, as a general rule, the tax system of an EFTA State is not covered by the EEA Agreement.
Det er op til hver EFTA-stat at tilrettelægge og anvende et skattesystem efter sine egne politiske valg.
It is for each EFTA State to design and apply a tax system according to its own choices of policy.
Men en skatteforanstaltning som den kompensation for indgående moms, der ydes efter momskompensationslovens § 3, kan have konsekvenser, der bevirker, at EØS-aftalens artikel 61, stk. 1, finder anvendelse på den.
However, application of a tax measure, such as the input tax compensation provided for in Article 3 of the VAT Compensation Act, may have consequences that would bring it within the scope of Article 61(1) of the EEA Agreement.
Ifølge retspraksis [17] sondres der i artikel 61, stk. 1, ikke mellem statslige foranstaltninger efter deres begrundelser eller formål, men de defineres alene ud fra deres virkninger.For det andet rejser spørgsmålet om, hvorvidt der er tale om statsstøtte, sig kun i det omfang, hvor der er tale om en økonomisk aktivitet, dvs. en aktivitet gående ud på at udbyde varer og tjenester på et givet marked [18].
According to the case-law [17], Article 61(1) does not distinguish between measures of State intervention by reference to their causes or aims but defines them in relation to their effects.Secondly, the question as to whether the measure at issue constitutes State aid arises only in so far as it concerns an economic activity, that is, an activity consisting of offering goods and services on a given market [18].
En foranstaltning udgør kun statsstøtte, hvis den begunstiger virksomheder.
A measure constitutes State aid only if it benefits undertakings.
På konkurrenceområdet omfatter virksomhedsbegrebet alle foretagender, der »udøver en økonomisk aktivitet, uanset hvilken juridiske status foretagendet har, og hvordan det finansieres« [19].
For the purposes of application of the rules on competition, the concept of an undertaking encompasses entities ‘engaged in an economic activity, regardless of the legal status of the entity and the way in which it is financed’ [19].
Selv om ikke alle de foretagender, der får deres indgående moms refunderet, opfylder virksomhedskriteriet, er den kendsgerning, at nogle af de foretagender, som momskompensationsloven begunstiger, er virksomheder, tilstrækkeligt til, at ordningen i relation til spørgsmålet om statsstøtte opfylder dette kriterium [20].For det tredje kan der ydes statsstøtte til offentlige såvel som til private virksomheder [21].
Although some of the entities which receive input tax refunds do not fulfil the condition of being an undertaking, the fact that some beneficiaries of the VAT Compensation Act are undertakings constitutes sufficient grounds to assess the scheme as such for State aid purposes [20].Thirdly, aid may be granted to public undertakings as well as to private undertakings [21].
For at en offentlig virksomhed skal kunne anses for at modtage statsstøtte, behøver den ikke nødvendigvis at have selvstændig status som juridisk person uafhængigt af staten.
A public undertaking, in order to be regarded as a recipient of State aid does not necessarily need to have a legal identity separate from the State.
At en virksomhed er et offentligretligt foretagende og ikke arbejder med gevinst for øje, betyder ikke nødvendigvis, at den ikke er en »virksomhed« i relation til statsstøttereglerne [22].Hvad angår de generelle bemærkninger fra de norske myndigheder om de tilsvarende ordninger, der findes i forskellige EU-lande, vil Tilsynsmyndigheden gerne slå fast, at disse ordninger måske ikke svarer til momskompensationsloven, og at den har underrettet Europa-Kommissionen om de norske myndigheders bemærkninger.
That an entity is governed by public law and is a non-profit making institution does not necessarily mean that it is not an ‘undertaking’ within the meaning of the State aid rules [22].Fourthly, regarding the general comments from the Norwegian authorities about the existence of similar schemes within the European Union, the Authority would like to note that these systems may be different from the VAT Compensation Act and that it has informed the European Commission about the observations of the Norwegian authorities.
Ifølge retspraksis gælder endvidere, at »en medlemsstats krænkelse af en forpligtelse, der påhviler den i henhold til traktaten, i forbindelse med forbuddet i artikel 92, ikke kan retfærdiggøres med, at andre medlemsstater heller ikke overholder denne forpligtelse.« [23].I det følgende vil Tilsynsmyndigheden tage stilling til, om momskompensationsordningen som en ordning [24] opfylder kriterierne i EØS-aftalens artikel 61, stk. 1, for at blive betragtet som statsstøtte.
Moreover, according to case law ‘any breach by a Member State of an obligation under the Treaty in connection with the prohibition laid down in Article 92 cannot be justified by the fact that other Member States are also failing to fulfil this obligation’ [23]In the following, the Authority will assess whether the VAT Compensation Act as a scheme [24] fulfils the criteria foreseen under Article 61(1) of the EEA Agreement to be considered State aid.
For at der skal kunne være tale om statsstøtte efter EØS-aftalens artikel 61, stk. 1, må støtten være ydet af staten med statsmidler.
In order to constitute State aid within the meaning of Article 61(1) of the EEA Agreement, the aid must be granted by the State through state resources.
Kompensationen ydes direkte af staten og ydes dermed af staten ved hjælp af statsmidler.
The compensation is granted by the State directly and is therefore granted by the State through state resources.
De norske myndigheder har gjort gældende, at momskompensationsordningen ikke er en støtteordning, fordi den er selvfinansierende.
The Norwegian authorities have argued that the VAT compensation scheme does not constitute an aid measure because it is a self-funding system.
Efter deres opfattelse finansierer kommunerne selv momskompensationsordningen gennem en nedsættelse af de bloktilskud, der via statsbudgettet ydes til kommunerne.
In their opinion, municipalities fund the VAT Compensation scheme themselves through a reduction of the general transfers from the State budget to the municipalities.
Med indførelsen af momskompensationsordningen i 2004 blev kommunernes bevillinger i den årlige finanslov reduceret med et beløb svarende til det forventede beløb for den indgående moms, de ville modtage kompensation for.
With the introduction of the VAT compensation scheme in 2004, the municipal appropriations in the annual fiscal budget were reduced in accordance with the expected amount of input tax compensated.
Tilsynsmyndigheden finder, at det ud fra en statsstøttebetragtning ikke er relevant, om tilskuddene til kommunerne er blevet reduceret eller ej.
The Authority considers that for State aid purposes it is not relevant whether the amount of money received by the municipalities has been diminished or not.
Hvad der derimod er af betydning, er, om virksomheder, der opfylder konkurrencereglernes virksomhedsdefinition, har modtaget økonomisk støtte fra staten ved hjælp af statsmidler.
What is important is whether undertakings within the meaning of the competition rules have received financial support by the State through state resources.
Når en kommune handler som en virksomhed, bør den i statsstøttehenseende betragtes adskilt fra kommunen i dens egenskab af offentlig myndighed.
When a municipality acts as an undertaking it should be viewed for State aid purposes separately from the municipality as a public authority.
Om statens omkostning ved at yde kompensation på det centrale niveau udlignes af lavere tilskud til kommuner og amter eller ej, ændrer intet ved denne konklusion.
Whether the State’s cost of the compensation at the central level is counterbalanced by reduced transfers to the local and regional authorities as such does not alter this conclusion.
Refusionen af den indgående moms finansieres over statsbudgettet, og den ydes derfor ved hjælp af statsmidler.
The refund for input tax paid is financed from the state budget and therefore constitutes state resources.
Efter Tilsynsmyndighedens opfattelse svarer den nedsættelse af overførslen fra staten, som hver kommune får, heller ikke nøjagtigt til den momskompensation, den modtager.
Moreover, in the Authority’s understanding, each municipality does not get a reduction in the state transfer exactly corresponding to the exact VAT compensation it receives.
En finansiel foranstaltning ydet af staten eller ved hjælp af statsmidler til en virksomhed, der fritager den fra omkostninger, som den normalt selv skulle have båret, udgør en økonomisk fordel [25].De norske myndigheder har gjort gældende, at momskompensationsordningen ikke udgør nogen fordel, da ordningen hverken indebærer nogen reduktion af afgiften eller nogen afgiftsudsættelse.
A financial measure granted by the State or through state resources to an undertaking which would relieve it from costs which would normally have to be borne by its own budget constitutes an economic advantage [25].The Norwegian authorities have argued that the VAT compensation scheme does not constitute an advantage because the scheme neither entails a reduction in the amount of tax nor any tax deferment.
Momskompensationsloven medfører ingen formindskelse af modtagerens afgiftstilsvar.
The VAT compensation scheme does not imply any reduction in the recipient’s tax burden.
Tilsynsmyndigheden er ikke enig heri.
The Authority does not share this approach.
Efter dens opfattelse har de norske myndigheder ikke foretaget den nødvendige sondring mellem statens forskellige roller — i dette tilfælde staten som afgiftsmyndighed, kommunerne som statslige organer og kommunale virksomheder som selvstændige enheder i statsstøttehenseende.
In its opinion the Norwegian authorities do not make the necessary differentiation between the various spheres of the State, i.e., in this case the State as tax authority, the municipalities as state bodies and municipal undertakings as separate entities for State aid purposes.
For at afgøre, om der foreligger en økonomisk fordel, må Tilsynsmyndigheden vurdere, om en foranstaltning fritager modtagerne for udgifter, som de normalt skulle bære som led i deres virksomhed.
To determine whether an economic advantage has been granted, the Authority has to assess whether a measure relieves its beneficiaries of charges that they normally bear in the course of their business.
Betaling af indgående moms er en driftsudgift, som en virksomhed normalt skal afholde i forbindelse med sin økonomiske aktivitet, og som normalt bæres af virksomheden selv.
The payment of input tax is an operating cost related to purchases in the normal course of an undertakings’ economic activity, which is normally borne by the undertaking itself.
I det omfang, hvor de norske myndigheder yder kompensation for indgående afgift ved køb af varer og tjenester til virksomheder, der falder ind under momskompensationslovens § 2, giver de disse virksomheder en økonomisk fordel.
To the extent that the Norwegian authorities compensate input tax on purchases of goods and services to undertakings falling within the scope of Article 2 of the VAT Compensation Act, they grant those undertakings an economic advantage.
De opnår en fordel, fordi de driftsudgifter, de ellers skulle afholde, reduceres med et beløb svarende til den indgående moms, de får kompensation for.
They are granted an advantage because the operating costs which those undertakings will have to put up with are reduced in accordance with the amount of input tax compensated.
Momskompensationsloven indebærer derfor en økonomisk fordel for de begunstigede virksomheder.
The VAT Compensation Act therefore entails the granting of an economic advantage to the beneficiaries of the scheme.