natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
De norske myndigheder har forklaret, at sådanne omkostningsbaserede priser svarer til markedspriser.
The Norwegian authorities have explained that such cost-based prices equal the market prices.
Som forklaret ovenfor oprettede AS Sporveisbussene i 2003 et datterselskab, Nexus Trafikk AS, for at kunne deltage i udbud om rutebuskørsel i Oslo.
As explained above, AS Sporveisbussene established a subsidiary in 2003, Nexus Trafikk AS, in order to participate in tenders for operating scheduled bus transport services in Oslo.
Oprettelsen af datterselskabet skabte en situation, hvor virksomhederne (AS Sporveisbussene og Nexus Trafikk AS) var fælles om visse omkostninger, fordi de begge leverede rutebusydelser.
The establishment of the subsidiary created a situation where the companies (AS Sporveisbussene and Nexus Trafikk AS), due to the fact that they both provided bus services, shared certain common costs.
De norske myndigheder har forklaret, at dette fik virksomhederne til at indføre et nyt system for fordeling af (de nye) fælles omkostninger.
The Norwegian authorities explained that this led the companies to establish a new system for allocating (the new) common costs.
Det nye system blev indført fra og med 2004.
The new system applied from 2004 onwards.
Ifølge det nye system dækkedes fælles omkostninger til it- og kommunikationsinfrastruktur, visse medarbejdere, konsulentydelser i relation til generelle kontrakter, revision, pension, forsikring, bogføring og lønadministration af alle relevante virksomheder i koncernen med en vis procentdel af hver virksomheds omsætning.
According to the new system, common costs such as IT and communication infrastructure, general PR costs, certain corporate staff, consultancy services related to general contracts, audit, pension, insurance, accounting and salary services were covered by all relevant companies of the group with a certain percentage of each company’s turnover.
Metoden til at beregne disse faste omkostninger er baseret på fastlæggelse af alle fælles omkostninger i den årlige budgetproces.
The method to calculate those overhead rates is based on the identification of all common costs through the budget process each year.
Disse omkostninger lægges så sammen, og den samlede andel af de faste omkostninger opnås ved at dividere AS Sporveisbussenes og datterselskabernes samlede omsætning med de faste omkostninger.
The amount of those costs is then summed up and the general overhead rate is estimated by dividing the identified common costs on the total turnover of AS Sporveisbussene and its subsidiaries.
De budgetterede samlede omkostninger for hver virksomhed skal dække de fælles omkostninger i det samlede budget.
The sum of budgeted overhead costs for each company shall cover the common costs included in the total budget.
Andelen var […] [47] % for 2004, […] [48] % for 2005 og 2006 og […] [49] % for 2007 og 2008.
The rate was […] [47] % for 2004, […] [48] % for 2005 and 2006, and […] [49] % for 2007 and 2008.
KAPITALINDSPRØJTNINGEN AF 2. APRIL 2004
CAPITAL INJECTION OF 2 APRIL 2004
Klageren anfører, at AS Oslo Sporveier overførte 41499000 NOK i ny kapital til AS Sporveisbussene i 2004, og påstår, at denne transaktion kan have omfattet statsstøtte, da ingen privat markedsinvestor ville have overført kapital til en tabsgivende virksomhed.
The complainant states that AS Oslo Sporveier transferred NOK 41499000 in new equity to AS Sporveisbussene in 2004, and alleges that this transaction may have involved state aid as no private market investor would have injected capital in a loss-making company.
Klageren sætter endvidere spørgsmålstegn ved, om der er overført kapital til finansiering af nye aktiviteter, som gennemføres i et konkurrencepræget marked.
The complainant furthermore questions whether capital has been injected in order to fund new activities taking place in a market exposed to competition.
De norske myndigheder har bekræftet, at Oslo kommune tilførte ny kapital til koncernen Oslo Sporveier den 2. april 2004, og at denne foranstaltning vedrørte et engangsbidrag til koncernens pensionskasse (Oslo Sporveiers Pensjonskasse) [50] til dækning af en akkumuleret underfinansiering i de eksisterende pensionskasseregnskaber.
The Norwegian authorities have confirmed that Oslo Municipality injected new capital into the Oslo Sporveier Group on 2 April 2004, and that this measure related to a one-time contribution to the pension fund of the Group (Oslo Sporveiers Pensjonskasse) [50] to cover an accumulated shortage of funds in the existing pension fund accounts.
Denne kapitalindsprøjtning til AS Sporveisbussene udgjorde 111760000 NOK.
The amount of this capital injection allocated to AS Sporveisbussene was NOK 111760000.
De norske myndigheder har desuden forklaret, at AS Sporveisbussene samtidig med kapitalindsprøjtningen ændrede regnskabsprincipper med henblik på at kunne anslå fremtidige pensionsforpligtelser med det resultat, at sådanne forpligtelser efter 2004 fremgik af regnskaberne [51]).
The Norwegian authorities have furthermore explained that at the same time as the capital injection took place, AS Sporveisbussene changed accounting principles for estimating future pension obligations with the result that from 2004 onwards such obligations were recognized in their accounts [51].
I lyset af oplysningerne fra de norske myndigheder kan Tilsynsmyndigheden kun forstå det sådan, at klageren i sin henvisning til overførslen af 41499000 NOK i sin korrespondance med Tilsynsmyndigheden har sammenlignet AS Sporveisbussenes regnskaber for 2003 og 2004 og fratrukket 39501000 NOK (samlet egenkapital i 2003) fra 81 mio. NOK (samlet egenkapital i 2004).
In light of the information submitted by the Norwegian authorities, the Authority can only understand that the complainant, when referring to the transfer of NOK 41499000 in its correspondence with the Authority, has compared the 2003 and 2004 accounts of AS Sporveisbussene, and deducted NOK 39501000 (total equity in 2003) from NOK 81 million (total equity in 2004).
I sin beslutning vil Tilsynsmyndigheden vurdere den faktiske kapitalindsprøjtning på 111760000 NOK, der er det beløb, som blev afsat til at dække AS Sporveisbussenes pensionsforpligtelser (og ikke de 41499000 NOK, som klageren har nævnt).
In this Decision, the Authority will assess the actual capital injection of NOK 111760000, which is the amount allocated to cover the pension obligations of AS Sporveisbussene (as opposed to NOK 41499000 referred to by the complainant).
De norske myndigheder har fremsendt redegørelser med en begrundelse for denne kapitalindsprøjtning, der vedrører AS Sporveisbussenes pensionsansvar.
The Norwegian authorities have submitted explanations regarding the rationale for this capital injection, which relates to the pension liabilities of AS Sporveisbussene.
Disse opsummeres nedenfor.
These are summarised in the following.
Underskuddet i AS Oslo Sporveier-koncernens pensionskasse og øget årlig kompensation i midten af 1990'erne
Mid-1990s shortfall in AS Oslo Sporveier Group’s pension fund and increased annual compensation
De norske lokale myndigheder – og selskaber, som de ejer eller kontrollerer – havde pligt til at tilbyde deres ansatte en indeksreguleret pension svarende til 70 % eller 66 % af deres endelige løn, når de blev 67 år og gik på pension [52].
The Norwegian local authorities – and companies owned or controlled by them – were obliged to provide their employees with an indexed pension equal to 70 % or 66 % of their final salary upon retirement at the age of 67 [52].
I midten af 1990'erne stod det klart, at Oslo Sporveier-koncernens pensionskasse var underfinansieret. Underfinansieringen var akkumuleret over flere år, da der ved indbetalingen af præmier til pensionskassen ikke var taget tilstrækkeligt hensyn til de øgede pensionsforpligtelser, der skyldtes faktorer såsom lønstigninger, længere forventet levetid, ændringer i forventninger til handicap osv.
By the mid-1990s, it had become clear that the pension fund of the Oslo Sporveier Group was underfunded.
Oslo kommune var derfor i sin egenskab af ejer ved lov forpligtet til at dække underfinansieringen i Oslo Sporveier-koncernen [54].
Oslo Municipality, as its owner, was therefore obliged by law to cover the underfunding of the Oslo Sporveier Group [54].
Ifølge beslutningen af 23. december 1996 skulle AS Oslo Sporveier derfor indsende en plan for, hvordan man ville udligne denne mangel.
Thus, as resolved by decision of 23 December 1996, AS Oslo Sporveier had to submit a plan on how to make up for the shortfall.
Ifølge betalingsplanen hævede Oslo kommune den årlige kompensation for offentlig tjeneste for at dække de øgede pensionspræmier.
In accordance with the payment plan, Oslo Municipality adjusted upwards the annual public service compensation so as to cover the increased pension premiums.
Kapitalindsprøjtning til Oslo Sporveiers Pensjonskasse
Capital injection into Oslo Sporveiers Pensjonskasse
Ifølge de norske myndigheder besluttede Oslo kommune i 2003 at dække underskuddet i Oslo Sporveier-koncernens pensionskasse med et engangsbeløb.
According to the Norwegian authorities, Oslo Municipality decided in 2003 to cover the pension fund shortfall at the Oslo Sporveier Group with a one-time payment.
Følgelig overførte AS Oslo Sporveier den 2. april 2004 802,5 mio. NOK [55] til Oslo Sporveiers Pensjonskasse for at dække den samlede underfinansiering [56].
As a result, on 2 April 2004, AS Oslo Sporveier injected NOK 802,5 million [55] in Oslo Sporveiers Pensjonskasse to cover the current total shortfall [56].
Kapitalindsprøjtningen dækkede underfinansieringen af pensionsforpligtelsen, der var knyttet til de ansatte i Oslo Sporvognsdrift AS, Oslo T-banedrift AS, AS Oslo Sporveier og AS Sporveisbussene.
The capital injection covered the underfunding of the pension liabilities relating to the employees of Oslo Sporvognsdrift AS, Oslo T-banedrift AS, AS Oslo Sporveier and AS Sporveisbussene.
De norske myndigheder forklarede, at Oslo kommune, selv om den ved lov havde pligt til at dække underfinansieringen i Oslo Sporveier-koncernen, ikke havde pligt til at gøre dette i form af et engangsbeløb. Det valgte den at gøre, da denne løsning ville være mere omkostningseffektiv end at videreføre den eksisterende amortiseringsplan.
The Norwegian authorities explained that although Oslo Municipality was obliged by law to cover the underfunding of Oslo Sporveier Group, it was not required to do so by a one-time payment: it chose to do so as this solution would be more cost efficient than adhering to the existing amortisation plan.
Det årlige amortiserede beløb til betaling af underfinansieringen var højere end finansieringsomkostningerne ved betaling af et banklån af samme størrelse.
The annual amortised amount to service the underfunding was higher than the finance costs needed to service a bank loan of the same size.
Desuden anslog man, at en engangsbetaling ville give besparelser i driftsbudgettet på omkring 160 mio. NOK og reducere koncernens årlige pensionsomkostninger med 60 mio. NOK.
Moreover, a one-time payment was estimated to provide savings in the operating budget of approximately NOK 160 million, and reduce the Group’s annual pension costs by NOK 60 million.
Af de 802,5 mio. NOK dækkede 111760000 NOK AS Sporveisbussenes pensionsforpligtelser.
Of the NOK 802,5 million, NOK 111760000 covered the pension obligations of AS Sporveisbussene.
Ifølge de norske myndigheder blev det fulde beløb betalt direkte fra AS Oslo Sporveier til Oslo Sporveiers Pensjonskasse og ikke overført som kontanter til AS Sporveisbussene.
According to the Norwegian authorities the full amount was paid directly from AS Oslo Sporveier to the Oslo Sporveiers Pensjonskasse and was not transferred as cash to AS Sporveisbussene.
I AS Sporveisbussenes årsregnskaber for 2004 blev pensionsbidraget på 111760000 NOK registreret som en indsprøjtning af ny egenkapital.
In the annual accounts of AS Sporveisbussene for 2004, the pension contribution of NOK 111760000 was recorded as an injection of new share capital.
Underfinansiering af pensionsforpligtelser for ansatte i turistbusafdelingen
Underfunding of the pension liabilities for the tour bus employees
Ifølge de norske myndigheder dækkede en del af kapitalindsprøjtningen til AS Sporveisbussene pensionsforpligtelser, der var knyttet til ansatte i turistbusafdelingen for perioden 1994 (da turistbusdriften startede) til den 1. januar 1997.
According to the Norwegian authorities, a part of the capital injection transferred to AS Sporveisbussene covered pension liabilities for employees in the tour bus operation for the period 1994 (when the tour bus operations commenced) until 1 January 1997.
De norske myndigheder har indsendt beregninger, der viser, at omkring 430300 NOK af den samlede kapitalindsprøjtning vedrørte underfinansiering af pensionsforpligtelser i turistbusafdelingen.
The Norwegian authorities have submitted calculations according to which approximately NOK 430300 of the total capital injection was related to pension liability underfunding in the tour bus division.
Overførsel af pensionskasse til Vital Forsikring ASA
Change of pension funds to Vital Forsikring ASA
Betalingen af 111760000 NOK betød også, at AS Sporveisbussene kunne overføre sin pensionskasse fra Oslo Sporveiers Pensjonskasse til Vital Forsikring ASA, som er et livsforsikringsselskab.
The payment of NOK 111760000 also enabled AS Sporveisbussene to transfer its pension fund from Oslo Sporveiers Pensjonskasse to Vital Forsikring ASA, a life insurance company.
BESKATNING AF OSLO SPORVEIER-KONCERNEN
TAXATION OF THE OSLO SPORVEIER GROUP
Klagerens påstande
Allegations of the complainant
Ifølge klageren er AS Oslo Sporveiers skattemæssige underskud blevet brugt til at lempe AS Sporveisbussenes skattebyrde.
According to the complainant, AS Oslo Sporveier’s negative tax position has been used to reduce the tax burden on AS Sporveisbussene.
Gunstige skattevilkår i Oslo Sporveier-koncernen kunne være blevet brugt til at undgå betaling af skat på overskud hidrørende fra et marked, som var helt eller delvist konkurrencebetonet.
Favourable tax conditions in the Oslo Sporveier Group could possibly have been used to avoid payment of tax on profits made in a market wholly or partially exposed to competition.
Grundlaget for klagen ser ud til at være, at AS Sporveisbussene i perioden 2000-2004 havde et overskud før skat på omkring 54796000 NOK, men kun indberettede en skattepligtig indkomst på 2027000 NOK.
The basis for this complaint seems to be that AS Sporveisbussene in the period 2000–2004, while having a profit before tax of approximately NOK 54796000, only reported a taxable income of NOK 2027000.
Ifølge de norske myndigheder og efter Tilsynsmyndighedens mening ser det ud til, at klageren henviser til skattebestemmelserne for bidrag mellem virksomheder, der tilhører samme koncern (koncernbidrag).
According to the Norwegian authorities, and in the Authority’s view, it appears that the complainant refers to the tax rules regarding contributions between companies belonging to the same group (group contributions).
AS Sporveisbussene har åbenbart overført dele af sit overskud og dermed undgået at betale indkomstskat af det overførte beløb.
AS Sporveisbussene has apparently transferred parts of its profits, thus avoiding the payment of income tax on the amount transferred.
De relevante bestemmelser i den norske skattelov
The relevant provisions of the Norwegian Tax Act
Ifølge den norske skattelov [58] beskattes virksomheder henhørende under samme koncern som selvstændige enheder. Som udgangspunkt konsolideres en flerhed af virksomheder ikke i skattemæssig henseende, hvilket betyder, at en virksomhed kun kan fratrække sine egne tab og kun skal betale skat af sit eget overskud.
According to the Norwegian Tax Act [58], companies within a group shall be taxed as single entities; there is, at the outset, no consolidation of groups of companies for tax purposes, which means that a company may only deduct its own losses and is liable to pay tax only on its own profits.
På visse vilkår tillader skattebestemmelserne dog en virksomhed at få et fradrag i sin skattepligtige indkomst for et ensidigt kapitalbidrag ydet til en anden virksomhed i koncernen som et såkaldt "koncernbidrag".
However, under certain conditions, the tax rules permit a company to deduct from its taxable income a unilateral contribution of capital made to another company within its group as a so called “group contribution”.
Koncernbidrag er tilladt [59], når den bidragydende og den modtagende virksomhed er aktieselskaber [60] og tilhører samme koncern. [61].
Group contributions are allowed [59] when the granting company and the receiving company are limited liability companies [60] and belong to the same group [61].
Dertil kommer, at moderselskabet skal eje over 90 % af datterselskabet og have en lige så stor andel af stemmerettighederne [62].
In addition, the parent company has to own more than 90 % of the subsidiary, as well as hold an equivalent share of the votes [62].
De norske myndigheder har forklaret, at disse krav skal opfyldes inden udgangen af det relevante regnskabsår, hvor koncernbidraget betales.
The Norwegian authorities have explained that these requirements must be met at the end of the relevant financial year in which the group contribution is made.
Den bidragydende og den modtagende virksomhed skal i deres årlige selvangivelse anføre bidragene til skattemyndighederne i form af fuldstændige oplysninger anført på relevante formularer.
The granting and the receiving companies must, as part of their annual tax return, disclose the contributions to the tax authorities by submitting complete information on designated forms.
Et koncernbidrag skal bestå af penge, driftskapital eller andre finansielle bidrag [63].
A group contribution may consist of money, working capital or other financial contributions [63].
Et koncernbidrag kan fratrækkes for den bidragydende virksomhed, i det omfang bidraget er dækket af dennes skattepligtige indkomst [64].
A group contribution is deductible for the granting company to the extent that the contribution is covered by its taxable income [64].
Når en virksomhed yder et koncernbidrag, der overstiger dens skattepligtige indkomst, kan den ikke fratrække det overskydende beløb [65].
When a company grants a group contribution exceeding its taxable income, it cannot deduct the excess amount [65].
Den modtagende virksomhed er ansvarlig for at svare skat af koncernbidraget [66], men det overskydende beløb, der ikke kan fratrækkes, udgør ikke en skattepligtig indkomst for den modtagende virksomhed.
The receiving company, on the other hand, is liable for paying taxes on the group contribution [66], but the excess, non-deductible amount does not constitute a taxable income on the hand of the recipient company.
Bidraget betragtes som en indkomst for den modtagende virksomhed i samme år, som den bidragydende virksomhed fratrækker bidraget på sin selvangivelse.
The contribution is considered as income for the receiving company in the same year as the granting company deducts the contribution in its tax assessment.
Har modtageren et underskud, kan bidraget udligne tab, også fra foregående år.
Provided that the recipient suffers a deficit, the contribution may be set off against any losses, also those incurred in previous years.
Kravene vedrørende et aktieselskabs udlodning af udbytte skal desuden også være opfyldt [67].
Moreover, the requirements related to a limited liability company’s distribution of dividends must be met [67].
De norske myndigheder har forklaret, at bestemmelserne for koncernbidrag gælder for alle selskaber, der er omfattet af norsk skattelovgivning.
The Norwegian authorities have explained that the group contribution rules apply indiscriminately to all corporate entities that are subject to Norwegian income tax.
Anvendelsen af bestemmelserne kræver ikke tilladelse, licens eller tilsvarende samtykke fra en offentlig myndighed.
The application of the rules does not require any form of government permit, licence or similar consent by any public authority.
Bestemmelserne finder anvendelse, uanset hvem der kontrollerer koncernen, om den er norsk eller udenlandsk eller privatejet eller offentligt ejet.
The rules apply regardless of who controls the group, whether it is of domestic or foreign origin, or privately or publicly owned.
Formålet med bestemmelserne for koncernbidrag
The rationale of the group contribution rules
De norske myndigheder har forklaret, at formålet med bestemmelserne er at skabe en ensartet skattebehandling og skatteneutralitet mellem i) selskaber med en koncernstruktur og ii) selskaber, der driver flere virksomheder som et enkelt selskab.
The Norwegian authorities have explained that the purpose of the rules is to establish similar tax treatment and tax neutrality between (i) companies organised as a group structure and (ii) companies that operate several businesses as a single company.
Formålet opfyldes ved at tillade virksomhedskoncerner at fratrække tab i et (eller flere) af selskaberne fra overskud i andre af samme koncerns virksomheder, således at beskatningen af koncernen rent faktisk kan ske på grundlag af dennes konsoliderede skattepligtige nettooverskud.
This purpose is attained by allowing groups of companies to offset the losses made by one (or several) of its companies against profits made by other companies in the same group, thus in effect allowing the taxation of the group on the basis of its consolidated net taxable profits.
De norske myndigheder har forklaret, at formålet eller sigtet med bestemmelserne for koncernbidrag aldrig har været at skabe fordele for bestemte virksomheder på grundlag af selskabernes ejerforhold, eller hvilken form for forretningsaktiviteter de gennemfører.
The Norwegian authorities have explained that the purpose or aim of the group contribution rules has never been to provide benefits to particular businesses on the basis of who owns the companies or what kind of business the companies engage in.
Oslo Sporveier-koncernens anvendelse af bestemmelserne for koncernbidrag
Application of group contribution rules by the Oslo Sporveier Group
De norske myndigheder har forklaret, at AS Sporveisbussene ydede 4068000 NOK i koncernbidrag i 2000 og 8365000 NOK i 2001 til AS Oslo Sporveier, mens der ikke blev ydet bidrag i årene 2002-2004 på grund af skattemæssige tab [68].
The Norwegian authorities have explained that AS Sporveisbussene granted NOK 4068000 in group contributions in 2000 and NOK 8365000 in 2001 to AS Oslo Sporveier, whereas there were no contributions in the years 2002–2004 due to tax losses [68].
DE NORSKE MYNDIGHEDERS BEMÆRKNINGER TIL BESLUTNINGEN OM AT INDLEDE DEN FORMELLE UNDERSØGELSESPROCEDURE
COMMENTS TO THE OPENING DECISION FROM THE NORWEGIAN AUTHORITIES
Mere detaljerede faktuelle oplysninger og Asplan Viak-rapporten
More detailed factual information and the Asplan Viak Report
De norske myndigheders bemærkninger til beslutningen om at indlede den formelle undersøgelsesprocedure indeholdt faktuelle oplysninger af relevans for vurderingen af de foranstaltninger, der var genstand for undersøgelsen.
In their comments to the opening decision the Norwegian authorities provided more factual information relevant for the assessment of the measures subject to the formal investigation.
Disse oplysninger fremgår af ovenstående punkter.
This information has been incorporated in the sections above.
Ud over disse forhold har de norske myndigheder fremsendt en rapport til Tilsynsmyndigheden, dateret den 25. maj 2012, om effektiviteten i AS Sporveisbussene for årene 1999 og 2002. De norske myndigheder havde bestilt rapporten fra et uafhængigt konsulentbureau ved navn Asplan Viak AS ("Asplan Viak-rapporten") [69].
In addition to those facts, the Norwegian authorities have provided the Authority with a report dated 25 May 2012 on the efficiency of AS Sporveisbussene for the years 1999 and 2002 commissioned by the Norwegian authorities from an independent consultant by the name of Asplan Viak AS (“the Asplan Viak Report”) [69].