natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Hvis sikkerheden baseres p en vurdering af kontrolrisiciene, skal revisor imidlertid evaluere det interne kontrolsystem og kontrollere, hvordan det virker, og konkludere, at det fungerer effektivt. 
However, assurance from the assessment of control risk requires the auditor to evaluate and test the operation of the internal control system and conclude that it operating to a high standard.
To tredjedele af de attesterende organer sżgte at n det fastsatte sikkerhedsniveau (95 % som anbefalet af Kommissionen) udelukkende p grundlag af substanstest af udvalgte transaktioner i stikprżven (se tabel 5). 
Two thirds of the Certifying Bodies sought to obtain all the required assurance (95 % recommended by the Commission) from substantive tests on sample items (see Table 5).
Nogle attesterende organer baserede sig p tidligere erfaringer og en effektiv intern kontrol for at reducere den sikkerhed, der skulle opns ved stikprżvekontrol, og reducerede p den baggrund stikprżvens stżrrelse. 
Some Certifying Bodies relied on earlier experience and good internal control in order to reduce the level of assurance obtained from sample testing, thereby reducing the sample size (see Table 5).
Danmark vurderede risikoen for hver enkelt population, og stikprżvens stżrrelse blev beregnet, s man i forbindelse med markafgrżder opnede 80 % sikkerhed ved stikprżvekontrol og i forbindelse med eksportrestitutioner 90 %. 
Denmark assessed the risk for each population and set its sample so as to obtain 80 % of its assurance from sample testing for arable crops and 90 % for export refunds.
Det attesterende organ for ENR (Italien) sżgte at opn 80 % sikkerhed ved stikprżvekontrol og baserede resten p en evaluering af de interne kontrolprocedurer og isžr den interne (1) Den mest sandsynlige fejlvžrdi beregnes ved, at de fejl, der er konstateret i stikprżven, ekstrapoleres p hele populationen. 
The Certifying Body for ENR (Italy) sought to obtain 80 % of its assurance from the sample, relying, for the remainder, on its evaluation of the internal control procedures and in particular the work performed by the internal audit unit, despite the fact that the area aid measure was introduced for (1) The most likely error is an extrapolation of the errors found in the sample to project them across the population.
Den żvre fejlgržnse er den mest sandsynlige fejlvžrdi plus en statistisk margen for at tage hensyn til risikoen for, at stikprżven ikke er repržsentativ for populationen. revisionsafdelings arbejde. Arealstżtten blev imidlertid fżrst indfżrt i 1998, og hverken det attesterende organ eller den interne revision havde nogen erfaring med at revidere en sdan ordning. 
The upper error limit is the most likely error plus a statistical allowance to take account of the risk that the sample may not be representative of the population. the first time in 1998 and, consequently, neither the Certifying Body nor internal audit had any experience of auditing such a scheme.
I Irland sżgte det attesterende organ at opn 75 % sikkerhed ved stikprżvekontrol i forbindelse med de fleste af de reviderede ordninger. 
In Ireland, the Certifying Body sought to obtain 75 % of its assurance from the sample for most of the schemes audited.
Det Forenede Kongerige skaffede sig mellem 63 og 74 % sikkerhed ved substanstest og resten ved en evaluering af iboende risici og kontrolrisici. 
The United Kingdom has obtained between 63 % and 74 % of its assurance from substantive testing the balance coming from its evaluation of inherent and control risks.
En sdan fremgangsmde er acceptabel, hvis det attesterende organ kan dokumentere, at det kan f resten af den sikkerhed, der kržves, fra andre kilder. 
These reduced assurance levels are acceptable where the Certifying Body can demonstrate that it can obtain the additional assurance required from other sources.
Stikprżvens stżrrelse 40. 
Sample size 40.
I den vejledning om stikprżvekontrol og fejlvurdering, Kommissionen udsendte i juli 1998, anbefales det, at mindst 85 % sikkerhed opns ved substanstest. 
The guidelines on ÔSampling and error evaluationŐ issued by the Commission in July 1998 suggest that at least 85 % of the assurance should be obtained from substantive testing.
Det forudsžtter en stikprżve p mindst 223 transaktioner og helt op til 406, hvis det fastsatte niveau skal ns alene ved substansrevision. 
This implies a minimum sample size of 223 transactions, rising to 406 where all of the assurance has to be obtained from substantive testing.
Selv om denne vejledning blev udsendt for sent til at f indvirkning p den stikprżvekontrol, de attesterende organer udfżrte i forbindelse med attesteringen af 1998-regnskaberne, udtog de fleste attesterende organer rent faktisk stikprżver af denne stżrrelsesorden. 
Although this guideline was issued too late to affect the sampling carried out by the Certifying Bodies for 1998 certification, most Certifying Bodies did in fact take samples within this range.
Nogle kontrollerede langt flere transaktioner, end anvendelsen af MUS strengt taget kržver. 
Some tested far more transactions than the strict application of MUS required.
F.eks. kontrollerede RRV (Sverige) dobbelt s mange. 
For example, RRV (Sweden) tested twice as many.
I 1998 kontrollerede de attesterende organer ca. 32 000 betalinger. 
For 1998, the Certifying Bodies tested some 32 000 payments.
Der er vžsentlig forskel p, hvor mange transaktioner der blev revideret i de forskellige lande: fra 131 i Gržkenland til over 11 000 i Spanien. 
At national level the differences between the numbers of transactions tested is particularly noticeable, ranging from 131 for Greece to over 11 000 for Spain.
Fejlvurdering 42. 
Error evaluation 42.
19 (aflżst af ISA nr. 530). I henhold hertil skal revisor analysere alle de fejl, der afdžkkes i stikprżven, og projicere de fundne fejl i stikprżven over p populationen. 
The Commission guideline cites IAS 19 (superseded by ISA 530): ÔThe auditor should analyse any errors detected in the sample and project the errors found in the sample to the population.
Revisor skal sammenholde den projicerede fejlvžrdi i populationen med den acceptable fejlvžrdi. 
The auditor must compare the projected population error to the tolerable errorŐ.
Til dette forml skal det attesterende organ beregne den mest sandsynlige fejlvžrdi (MSF) og den żvre fejlgržnse (ŻFG) (2). 
For this purpose the Certifying Body should calculate the MLE and the UEL (2).
Det vil rent faktisk sige, at kun hvis den żvre fejlgržnse er lavere end den p forhnd fastsatte vžsentlighedstžrskel, kan revisor vžre 95 % sikker p, at der ikke er tale om en vžsentlig forekomst af fejl. 
Strictly speaking, only if the UEL is below the preset materiality threshold will the auditor be 95 % sure that there is not a material incidence of error.
2 ( ) Den mest sandsynlige fejlvžrdi = summen af ASI taintings (ASI = Average Sampling Interval). 
2 ( ) MLE = sum of taintings*ASI (average sampling interval).
Żvre fejlgržnse = basispržcision + summen af ASI PC taintings (Poisson-koefficient) + kendte (systematiske) fejl. 
UEL = basic precision + sum of taintings*ASI*PC (Poisson coefficient) + known (systematic) errors.
C 69/16 DA De Europžiske Fžllesskabers Tidende 2.3.2001 43. 
C 69/16 EN Official Journal of the European Communities 2.3.2001 43.
Fejl kan opdeles i to typer, substansfejl og formelle fejl. 
Errors may be divided into two main types, substantive and formal.
Sub-stansfejl er fejl, der har en finansiel effekt, idet de betyder, at der er udbetalt et forkert belżb til modtageren, og at Kommissionen efterfżlgende fejlagtigt har godtgjort denne betaling. 
Substantive errors are errors with some sort of financial impact, implying that the wrong amount has been paid to the beneficiary and subsequently erroneously reimbursed by the Commission.
Formelle fejl er fejl i forbindelse med hndteringen af en bestemt transaktion, men det belżb, der er udbetalt til modtageren og anmeldt til Kommissionen, er korrekt. 
Formal errors are errors in the handling of a specific transaction, but where the correct amount was paid to the beneficiary and declared to the Commission.
I forbindelse med attestering af regnskaber interesserer Kommissionen sig kun for substansfejl. 
In terms of the certification of accounts, the Commission is only concerned with substantive errors.
Inden for denne kategori sondrer den mellem systematiske fejl og tilfžldige (enkeltstende) fejl. 
Within this category, it distinguishes between systematic and random (one-off) errors.
Systematiske fejl skal undersżges nžrmere for at afgżre fejlens faktiske omfang i populationen og skal ikke ekstrapoleres. 
Systematic errors should be investigated to determine the actual extent of the error in the population and should not be extrapolated.
Tilfžldige fejl, der findes i stikprżven, skal ekstrapoleres. 
Random errors found in the sample should be extrapolated.
Det er Rettens opfattelse, at de fejlvurderinger, som forekommer i de attesterende organers rapporter, i nogle tilfžlde er ufuldstžndige eller usammenhžngende. 
The Court considers that the error evaluations, as presented in the Certifying BodiesŐ reports, are, in some cases incomplete or inconsistent.
De attesterende organer beregnede MSF for 37 betalingsorganer (der tegnede sig for 36 % af udgifterne). For disse organer udgżr den samlede vžrdi af fejlene 43,4 millioner euro, svarende til en fejlfrekvens p 0,2 %. 
For the 37 paying agencies (covering 36 % of expenditure), for which the Certifying Bodies calculated the MLE, the total error amounts to 43,4 million euro equivalent to an error rate of 0,2 %.
Af de attesterende organers rapporter om 17 andre betalingsorganer (som tegnede sig for 33 % af udgifterne) fremgr det udtrykkeligt, at der ikke var fundet fejl. 
For 17 other paying agencies (covering 33 % of expenditure), the Certifying BodyŐs reports explicitly state that no errors were found.
For de resterende 37 betalingsorganers vedkommende (31 % af udgifterne) fremgr det enten ikke klart, hvorvidt der var fundet fejl, eller fejlene var ikke blevet ekstrapoleret. 
For the remaining 37 paying agencies (31 % of expenditure) it is either not clear whether errors were found or they were not extrapolated.
Kommissionen foretog en ny fejlvurdering for Tyskland og konstaterede da, at tre attesterende organer (Bayern, Baden-Wrttemberg og Niedersachsen) fejlagtigt havde godkendt betalingsorganernes regnskaber. 
When the Commission recalculated the error evaluations for Germany three Certifying Bodies, (Bavaria, Baden-Wrttemberg, Lower Saxony), were found to have incorrectly approved the paying agenciesŐ accounts.
To af de attesterende organer (Bayern og Baden-Wrttemberg) omklassificerede senere nogle tilfžldige fejl til systematiske fejl og overbeviste derved Kommissionen om, at regnskaberne var korrekte. 
Subsequently, two of the Certifying Bodies (Bavaria and Baden-Wrttemberg), by reclassifying some random errors as systematic errors convinced the Commission that their accounts were correct.
Tilsvarende fandt det attesterende organ i Sverige to fejl, som burde have fet det til at udstede en attest med forbehold, men det besluttede at klassificere den stżrste som en systematisk fejl og foretage yderligere revision. 
Similarly, in Sweden the Certifying Body found two errors which should have led it to qualify the accounts but decided to classify the larger of the two errors as systematic and carry out further work.
Dette er i overensstemmelse med den nye vejledning, der blev udsendt i juli 1998, og som giver medlemsstaterne mulighed for at undg at udstede attester med forbehold, hvis de foretager yderligere revision. 
This option is foreseen under the new guideline issued in July 1998 and effectively allows the Member States to avoid qualification by investing in extra audit work.
Det er efter Rettens opfattelse kun acceptabelt, hvis revisionen foretages, fżr attesten udstedes. 
In the CourtŐs view, this is only acceptable if carried out before the submission of the certificate.
De attesterende organer har ikke fulgt op p de fejl, de havde afslżret i forbindelse med attesteringen af regnskaberne for de foregende r. 
The Certifying Bodies visited do not follow up errors detected in the course of their work on the previous yearŐs certification.
Desuden fżrer Kommissionen ikke tilsyn med, hvordan fejlfrekvenserne udvikler sig. 
Moreover, the Commission does not monitor error rates.
Kommissionen bżr begynde at opbygge en database for at kunne afgżre, hvorvidt situationen i et givet betalingsorgan bliver bedre eller vžrre, og for at kunne afdžkke alle tilsyneladende usždvanlige forhold vedrżrende de fejlfrekvenser, de attesterende organer har indberettet for forskellige betalingsorganer inden for samme medlemsstat. 
In order to determine whether the situation is improving or deteriorating at a particular paying agency, or to identify any apparent anomalies amongst the error rates reported by the Certifying Bodies for different paying agencies within the same Member State the Commission should start to compile a database.
Lokalkontorer og kontrol p stedet 48. 
Local offices and on-the-spot controls 48.
Nogle attesterende organer har ikke džkket lokalkontorer i fornżdent omfang. 
Some Certifying Bodies have not adequately covered local offices.
I de selvstyrende regioner i Spanien er et antal regionale kontorer og et langt stżrre antal lokalkontorer f.eks. involveret i behandlingen af ansżgninger, men kun f har haft besżg af det attesterende organ (1). 
In Spain for example, within the autonomous communities there are a number of regional offices and a far larger number of local offices involved in the handling of claims, but few are visited by the Certifying Body (1).
Forordning (EF) nr. 1663/95 indeholder ingen bestemmelser om, at de attesterende organer ikke m udfżre kontrol p stedet hos de endelige stżttemodtagere. 
Regulation (EC) No 1663/95 does not preclude the Certifying Bodies from carrying out on the spot visits at final beneficiary level.
De skal attestere, at betalingsorganet er i stand til at sikre, at ansżgningerne er i overensstemmelse med EF-reglerne, fżr betalingerne gennemfżres (jf. punkt 5). 
They are required to certify that the paying agency is able to ensure that claims comply with Community rules before they are paid (see paragraph 5).
I praksis vil det for de fleste ordningers vedkommende vžre ensbetydende med kontrol af, at det integrerede system er ivžrksat korrekt, og at der er foretaget de fornżdne inspektioner p de enkelte brug. 
In practice, for most schemes, this means whether the IACS has been properly implemented and the required level of on farm inspection has been carried out.
De fleste attesterende organer har kun bekržftet, at det kržvede antal inspektioner er foretaget, og har ikke foretaget fornyet inspektion eller deltaget i IFKS-inspektioner. 
Most Certifying Bodies have limited their scope to confirmation that the required number of inspections has been carried out and have neither re-performed nor accompanied IACS inspections.
De attesterende organer har normalt ikke oplysninger om fejlfrekvenser og sanktioner i forbindelse med det integrerede system, eller de gżr ikke brug af dem, nr de skal attestere, at EF-reglerne er overholdt. 
With regard to the error rates and penalties applied in the context of IACS, the Certifying Bodies do not generally have or make use of this information when certifying compliance with Community rules.
Kommissionen forlanger hverken, at betalingsorganerne skal fremlžgge klare resultater opnet p grundlag af kontrol af tilfžldigt udvalgte stikprżver og risikobaserede stikprżver, eller at de skal (1) I de tre selvstyrende regioner, Retten besżgte, var syv af de 18 regionale kontorer og tre af de 169 lokalkontorer blevet kontrolleret af de attesterende organer. 
The CommissionŐs failure to require the paying agencies to clearly present their findings in terms of random and risk-based samples (1) For the three autonomous communities visited by the Court, seven of the 18 regional offices and three of the 169 local offices were controlled by the Certifying Bodies.
2.3.2001 DA De Europžiske Fžllesskabers Tidende C 69/17 kvantificere de anvendte sanktioner. Det betyder, at en grundlžggende angivelse af den faktiske fejlvžrdi i den population, der er omfattet af det integrerede system, ikke bliver beregnet. 
2.3.2001 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 69/17 and to quantify the sanctions applied means that a fundamental measurement of the actual value of error in the IACS population is not calculated.
Kommissionen bżr insistere p, at disse data forelžgges og kontrolleres af det attesterende organ. 
The Commission should insist that this data is provided and is verified by the Certifying Body.
I Sverige har det attesterende organ ifżlge loven ikke ret til at aflžgge besżg p stedet hos den endelige stżttemodtager. 
In Sweden, the Certifying Body does not have the legal right to carry out on-the-spot visits at final beneficiary level.
Reglerne i de żvrige medlemsstater er mere fleksible. 
The situation in other Member States is more flexible.
F.eks. har det attesterende organ i Żstrig ledsaget inspektżrerne p 29 IFKS-inspektioner. 
For example, in Austria, the Certifying Body has accompanied IACS inspectors on 29 visits.
I Spanien deltog det attesterende organ i n af de tre selvstyrende regioner, Retten besżgte, i tre af de ti nye inspektioner, der blev udfżrt af betalingsorganets tekniske tjenester. 
In Spain, in one of the three autonomous communities visited by the Court, the Certifying Body attended three re-inspections out of the 10 performed by the paying agencyŐs technical services.
I Nederlandene deltog det attesterende organ ikke i nogen inspektioner. 
In the Netherlands, the Certifying Body did not attend any inspections.
Efter Rettens opfattelse bżr de attesterende organer lžgge stżrre vžgt p at vurdere, hvor effektivt IFKS-kontrollen fungerer, og skaffe sig fżrstehndskendskab til forholdene ved at ledsage inspektżrerne bde p de normale inspektioner og p fornyede inspektioner. 
In the CourtŐs opinion the Certifying Bodies should give greater emphasis to their assessment of the effectiveness of IACS and should obtain first-hand knowledge by accompanying inspectors on both standard and reperformance inspections.
Det samme gžlder toldkontrollen. 
The same is true of customs controls.
Forbehold 51. 
Qualification of accounts 51.
Det fremgr af tabel 3, at antallet af regnskaber, over for hvilke de attesterende organer har taget forbehold, er faldet med 40 % (fra 21 til 13) i perioden fra 1996 til 1998. 
Table 3 shows that the number of accounts qualified by the Certifying Bodies has decreased by 40 % (21 to 13) over the 1996 to 1998 period.
Udgifterne i de regnskaber, over for hvilke der blev taget forbehold i 1998, andrager dog fortsat et uacceptabelt hżjt belżb, nemlig 11 700 millioner euro (30 %). 
However, the expenditure included in the accounts that have been qualified in 1998 remains unacceptably high at 11 700 million euro (30 %).
Der blev taget forbehold over for syv betalingsorganers regnskaber bde i 1996 og 1997, men de har senere fet blanke attester. 
Seven paying agencies had their accounts qualified for 1996 and 1997 but have subsequently been given clear certificates.
Tre betalingsorganer giver fortsat anledning til bekymring, fordi der blev taget forbehold over for deres regnskaber bde i 1997 og 1998, og blandt disse er det gržske, som er det tredjestżrste udbetalende organ. 
Three paying agencies give continuing cause for concern because they were qualified in 1997 and 1998, and among them is Greece, which is the third largest paying agency.
FEGA (Spanien) er det eneste betalingsorgan, over for hvis regnskaber der blev taget forbehold i tre p hinanden fżlgende r. 
Only the accounts for FEGA (Spain) have been qualified for three consecutive years.
De mest almindelige rsager til, at der udstedes en attest med forbehold, er begržnsninger i det attesterende organs arbejde (det kunne ikke f alle de oplysninger, det forlangte) og manglende opfyldelse af godkendelseskriterierne Ń bogfżring af lagre og debitorer, kontrol med organer, hvortil der er delegeret bestemte funktioner, de tekniske tjenesters indsats (IFKS) og regnskabs-og interne kontrolsystemer. 
The common reasons for qualification are scope limitation (the Certifying Body was not able to obtain all the information it required) and the failure to meet accreditation criteria Ń accounting for stocks and debtors, control over delegated bodies, performance of technical services (IACS), accounting and internal control systems.
Kommissionen tržffer efterfżlgende en ny beslutning, hvorved regnskabet afsluttes med eller uden korrektioner. 
The account is subsequently cleared by the Commission in a second decision, with or without corrections.
Nogle af de regnskaber, over for hvilke der er taget forbehold, accepteres af Kommissionen, fordi forbeholdet ikke har finansiel indvirkning p det pgžldende regnskabsr. 
Some qualified accounts are accepted by the Commission because the qualification has no financial importance to the year in question.
OVERENSSTEMMELSESBESLUTNINGER 53. 
CONFORMITY DECISIONS 53.
Den beslutning om regnskabsafslutning, der tržffes for et givet EUGFL-regnskabsr, forhindrer ikke Kommissionen i senere at afvise udgifter, som den ikke mener er afholdt i overensstemmelse med EF-reglerne. 
The financial clearance decision taken in respect of a given EAGGF year does not prevent the Commission from later disallowing expenditure that it considers has not been effected in accordance with Community rules.
De attesterende organer er ikke forpligtet til at attestere lovligheden og den formelle rigtighed af de udgifter, betalingsorganerne anmelder, men deres rapporter indeholder ofte bemžrkninger herom. 
Whilst the Certifying Bodies are not required to certify the legality and regularity of the expenditure declared by the paying agencies, their reports often contain observations of this nature.
Rapporterne er derfor nyttige for det kontor i GD for Landbrug, som er ansvarligt for at undersżge, om betalingerne er i overensstemmelse med EF-reglerne. 
The reports thus provide an input to the work of the unit in DG ÔAgricultureŐ which is responsible for conformity investigations.
Dette kontor har et omfattende lżbende program med at kontrollere, at EF-bestemmelserne er anvendt, som de skal, og at de belżb, de endelige stżttemodtagere har fet udbetalt, er korrekte. 
This unit has a substantial ongoing programme to check that the Community provisions have been properly implemented and that the payments to final beneficiaries were correct.
Hvis disse undersżgelser viser, at forvaltningen af landbrugsstżtten ikke har vžret tilfredsstillende, kan Kommissionen korrigere de pgžldende udgifter enten efter en fast sats (2, 5, 10 eller 25 %) eller, hvor det er muligt, p grundlag af en specifik beregning af, hvor store belżb der ukorrekt er udbetalt til stżttemodtagerne. 
Where these inspections show that the operation of agricultural subsidies has been unsatisfactory, the Commission can impose corrections, either on a flat-rate basis (2 %, 5 %, 10 %, 25 %) of the expenditure in question, or where possible, on the basis of specific quantifications of erroneous payments to beneficiaries.
Alle sdanne korrektioner, der foresls af Kommissionen enten som fżlge af en undersżgelse af sdanne bemžrkninger eller som resultat af Kommissionens egne undersżgelser, skal meddeles medlemsstaterne, som har ret til at forlange forligsproceduren ivžrksat. 
Any such corrections proposed by the Commission, either as a result of investigating such observations, or stemming from its own enquiries, must be notified to the Member States who have the right to invoke the conciliation procedure.
Fżrst nr denne procedure er afsluttet, kan Kommissionen tržffe en overensstemmelsesbeslutning. 
Only when this procedure has run its course is the Commission in a position to take a conformity decision.
Den fżrste overensstemmelsesbeslutning blev fżrst truffet i februar 1999 (se tabel 1) og omfattede primžrt korrektioner for gentagne mangler. 
The first conformity decision was not taken until February 1999 (see Table 1) and consisted for the most part of corrections for repeated weaknesses.