natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Problemer ved dannelse af partnerskaber
Problems in forming partnerships tendency for smaller organizations to be less pre­occupied with difficulties.
Godt halvdelen af de foreninger, der indgår i part­nerskaber, oplyser, at de er stødt på problemer ved dannelsen og driften af dem.
Just over half the voluntary organizations involved in them said that they had met problems in form­ing or running their partnerships.
Generelt ser resulta­terne på dette område ud som følger: om der er en tendens til, at mindre organisationer er knapt så optaget af problemer.
The broad find­ings were as follows:
• juridisk
Legal
Vi bad respondenterne om at oplyse os om, hvad de føler, er deres forenings primære, fremtidige
We asked respondents to tell us what they felt were their voluntary organization's main needs for the future.
• administrativt
• Administrative
• kommunikationsmæssigt
• Communication
• andet
• Other
Procenttallene viser den forholdsmæssige andel af de respondenter, der er stødt ind i de anførte pro­blemer.
The same demand exists in the sector in all the Member States, though there is a tendency for voluntary organiza­tions in poorer countries, where the sector tends to be less-well developed, to feel their comparative lack of funds more keenly.
Der er kun få tydelige forskelle mellem nationale, regionale og lokale organisationer, selv­
Voluntary organizations
Resultaterne viser tydeligt, at behovet for primært flere midler og derefter for mere personale til en vis grad er generelt.
The figures in brackets indicate the proportion of respondents encountering each kind of problem.
Foreninger er generelt ikke kapitalintensive, og det er derfor ikke
Few differences were apparent between national, regional or local organizations, though there was a
Europæiske foreningers/forbunds primære behov
Main needs of European associations/foundations
Mere lønnet personale
More paid staff
Rådgivning om ledelse
Advice on management
Andre behov
Other needs
overraskende, at der ikke her er det samme ønske om mere kapital.
are not, on the whole, capital-intensive, and it is not surprising, therefore, that there should not be the same desire for more capital.
Ikke desto mindre nævner næsten en fjerdedel af respondenterne kapital som et behov.
Nonetheless almost a quarter of our respondents mentioned capital as a need.
Det fremgår, at ønsket om mere lønnet personale er stærkest hos ældre foreninger (grundlagt mellem 1945 og 1950). Yngre foreninger derimod har i relativt højere grad behov for information og rådgivning om ledelse.
The desire for more paid staff appears to be felt most by older voluntary organizations (those founded between 1945 and 1950); younger voluntary organizations, in contrast, appear in relatively greater need of information and management advice.
Ønsket om flere frivillige er meget spredt, men ¡sær tydeligt blandt foreninger, der er aktive inden for »sundhed« og af indlysende grunde inden for »filantropi og voluntarisme«.
The desire for more volunteers was very widespread but particularly evident amongst voluntary organizations working in the fields of health and, for obvious reasons, in philanthropy and voluntarism.
Behovet for mere uddannelse nævnes af næsten en fjerdedel af respondenterne og synes at være et generelt fænomen for alle foreninger på alle områder, uanset alder.
The need for more training was mentioned by almost a quarter of respondents and appears to be felt by voluntary organizations working in all fields regardless of their age.
Punkter til overvejelse for Kommissionen: sektorens udvikling på europæisk plan
Points for the Commission: development of the sector at the European level
Til sidst bad vi respondenterne om at oplyse os om forhold, de ønsker at gøre Kommissionen opmærksom på, og om eventuelt at komme med forslag til, hvordan Kommissionen kan hjælpe med til at udvikle sektoren på europæisk plan.
Finally, we invited respondents to let us know of any points which they would like to bring to the attention of the Commission and to put forward any suggestions they might have about how the Commission might help the development of the sector at the European level.
De modtagne svar svinger lige fra enkle krav om »anerkendelse« i generel forstand (enten af den ideelle sektor eller af en bestemt organisation) til relativt komplekse forslag om ændringer i eller udbygning af Fællesskabets politik.
The answers we received ranged widely from simple demands for recognition in a quite general sense (either of the nonprofit sector or of some particular organization) to relatively complex suggestions for changes in, or extensions to, European Community policies.
Oversigt over den retlige og skatte- og afgiftsmæssige ramme for foreninger og fonde
Overview of the legal and fiscal framework for voluntary organizations and foundations endowment or of a regular dedicated source of income.
Nedenstående er en oversigt over hver medlems- stats juridiske og skattemæssige grundlag for driften af fonde og foreninger.
The following is an overview of the legal and fiscal basis on which foundations and voluntary organizations operate in each of the Member States.
I overensstemmelse med den definition, der er givet i afsnit 2.3, medtages de »økonomiske« foreninger ikke, der findes i nogle medlemsstater, og som kan engagere sig i erhvervsmæssige eller andre overskudsskabende aktiviteter. De forskellige typer af private fonde medtages heller ikke.
Following the definition given in paragraph 2.3. no account is taken of economic associations which exist in some Member States and which can engage in commercial or other profit-making activities, nor of the several varieties of private foundation.
Den del af sektoren, vi beskæftiger os med her, er derfor hverken helt privat eller helt offentlig.
That part of the sector of interest here is, therefore, neither wholly private nor wholly public in nature.
Heraf følger, at der grundlæggende i lovgivningen må være en måde, hvorpå denne sektors virkefelt kan afgrænses i forhold til de områder, der dækkes udelukkende af private aktiviteter, staten, erhvervsvirksomheder eller andre former for over skudsskabende aktiviteter.
It follows that fundamental to the law must be some means of demarcating its proper sphere of operation from the territory occupied by purely private activity, by government, or by commercial companies and other forms of profit-making enterprise.
Inden for Fællesskabet er dette sket enten formelt - ved at fastlægge grundlæggende karakteristika for den interne opbygning og ledelse, som ideelle organisationer skal opfylde, eller på basis af formål - ved at fast lægge, hvilke aktivitetsområder, der er »almennyttige«, samt ved at opstille andre regler, der definerer, hvordan organisationens ideelle status skal sikres. res.
Within the Community this has been achieved either formally - by setting out the basic features of internal organization and governance to which nonprofit organizations must conform; or by objects - by laying down what spheres of activity count as in the public interest and by establishing other rules defining how the non profit status of the organization is to be secured.
I store træk er den første af disse metoder, nemlig definitionen på ideelle organisationer på grundlag af formelle karakteristika, typisk for den civilretlige tradition. Den anden, nemlig afgrænsning af området for ideelle aktiviteter til gavn for almenvellet (»velgørenhed«) på basis af selve aktiviteten, er typisk for common law traditionen.
Broadly speaking the first of these approaches -that of defining nonprofits by their formal features is characteristic of the civil code tradition, and the second - that of delineating the sphere of nonprofit activity in the public interest (charity) by the purpose of the activity itself - is the fundamental feature of the common law tradition.
Friheden til at stifte, gå ind i eller endog at forlade en forening er i dag en rettighed (der normalt er grundlovssikret) i alle Fællesskabets medlemsstater.
The freedom to establish or join, or indeed to leave, a voluntary organization is nowadays a right (normally guaranteed under the constitution) in all Member States of the Community.
Foreningsfrihed er selvfølgelig ligeledes garanteret i henhold til den europæiske menneskerettig- hedskonvention ').
The right of association is, of course, also guaranteed under the European Convention on Human Rights.'
I det store og hele er det muligt for ethvert medlemslands statsborgere at stifte en forening eller fond hvor som helst i Fællesskabet, skønt nogle medlemsstater betinger sig, at et vist minimumsantal af deres egne statsborgere eller indbyggere skal være inddraget2). Nogle medlemsstater har imidlertid særlige love, som netop sigter på at gøre det muligt for udenlandske statsborge- re at stifte foreninger, der derefter, skønt underkastet de samme registrerings- eller offentliggørelseskrav som andre foreninger, drives i overensstemmelse med sådanne interne bestemmelser, som måtte blive fastlagt i det land, hvorfra stifter ne kommer.
Generally speaking it is possible for nationals of any Member State to establish a voluntary organization or foundation anywhere in the Community, although some Member States stipulate that there should be a minimum number of their own citizens or residents involved.2 Some Member States have, how ever, special statutes precisely to enable foreign nationals to establish voluntary organizations which, though subject to the same national registration or publication requirements as any other voluntary organization, are then run according to such internal regulations as may be laid down in the country from which the founders originate.
Mange eksperter trækker en skarp linje mellem de to metoder, og det er helt sikkert, at de retlige traditioner, de er baseret på, er meget forskellige.
Many commentators draw a sharp distinction between these two approaches, and it is certainly true that the legal traditions from which they derive are very different.
Den praktiske virkning af forskellen mellem metoderne kan imidlertid være overdrevet.
The practical effect of the difference in approach can, however, be exaggerated.
Mange retssystemer indeholder særlige lovmæssige bestemmelser for foreninger med visse bestemte mål, der anses for at være almennyttige, og som, sammenholdt med forskellige grader af skattelempelser, betyder, at organisationer i mange medlemsstater i praksis defineres med hensyn til både formel struktur og formål.
Many jurisdictions contain special legal pro visions for voluntary organizations with certain aims regarded as of public interest which, com bined with different levels of tax relief, means that in practical effect organizations in many Member
Det er ligeledes korrekt, at de grund-
' This is in fact ¡n contravention of Articles 6 and 52 of the Treaty on European Union.
Generelt er både foreninger og fonde privatretlige enheder, hvor retssystemer sondrer mellem privat ret og offentlig ret.
Generally speaking, where jurisdictions make the distinction between private and public law both voluntary organizations and foundations are entities of private law.
Ikke alle medlemsstater definerer foreninger eller fonde eksplicit og sondrer ikke grundlæggende mellem foreninger på den ene side og fonde på den anden.
Not all Member States define either voluntary organizations or foundations explicitly, and not all make a fundamental legal distinction between voluntary organizations on the one hand and foundations on the other.
I henseende til denne meddelelse skal foreninger imidlertid forstås som grupper af private, der har sluttet sig sammen med henblik på at nå et i offentlighedens interesse ideelt mål.
For present purposes, however, voluntary organizations can be taken as groups of private individuals who have come together for some nonprofit end In the public interest.
Fonde derimod er enheder, der har ansvaret for aktiver givet i form af gaver eller en fast, dedikeret indkomst, og som henlægges til et almennyttigt formål.
In contrast, foundations are entities which have charge of assets set aside for purposes in the public interest in the form of an
organisationer nægtes en særlig skattemæssig sta­tus (se nedenstående afsnit 11.14 og 11.15).
or with the responsible ministry, regional or local authority.
Vedtægterne (og ofte en fuldstændig eller delvis fortegnelse over medlemmer) kræves typisk, for at foreningen kan blive registreret enten hos den lokale domstol, det ansvarlige ministerium eller den regionale eller lokale myndighed.
All foundations have legal personality, which again is normally achieved by the publication of statutes, etc.
Alle fonde har status som juridisk person, hvilket normalt også opnås gennem offentliggørelse af vedtægter osv. I modsætning til foreninger er fonde generelt underlagt en vis grad af α priori kontrol for at sikre, at vedtægterne opfylder loven helt, at der er taget korrekt højde for den ledelsesmæssige kontinuitet (da det ofte er hensigten, at de skal eksistere »i al evighed«), og at deres tilsigtede aktiver er tilstræk­kelige til, at målene kan nås.
Unlike voluntary organizations, however, foundations are generally subject to some degree of a priori control to ensure that the statutes are in strict conformity to the law, that (since they are often intended to exist 'in perpetuity') management succession has been properly allowed for, and that their intended assets are adequate to achieve their ends.
læggende bestemmelser i loven om fonde (og især den vægt, der lægges på bevarelsen af aktiver ­med alt hvad det indebærer) i lande, der bygger på det civilretlige system, i praksis er meget sammen­faldende med det, man ser i de retssystemer, der bygger på common law.
States are defined in terms of both their formal structure and their objects. It is also true to say that in practical terms the basic provisions of the law on foundations (and in particular the emphasis given to the preservation of assets, with all that that implies) in code countries are also very similar to those found in common law jurisdictions.
Denne forbindelse er sandsynligvis historisk betinget.
The clear link here is probably historical.
Den common law, velgørenhed er underlagt, er udelukkende tradi­tionsbestemt, og der er aldrig grundlæggende ble­vet sondret mellem fonde og foreninger ­ begge former er truster til offentligt, velgørende formål.
The common law on charity has enjoyed an unbroken tradition and has never drawn a fundamental distinction between foundations and voluntary organizations - both are charitable trusts.
Da fondsbegrebet er ældst, har loven senere uden større tilpasninger ganske enkelt også fundet anvendelse på foreninger.
Since foundations are the older form, it appears that the law was simply applied later to voluntary organizations without any major adaptations.
I modsætning hertil har man i lande, der bygger på det civilretlige system, ikke oplevet den samme kontinuitet, hvilket har resulteret i, at lovgivningen er gået i forskellige retninger.
In contrast many code countries have not enjoyed the same continuity, the result being that the law has diverged.
I retssystemer, der bygger på common law, eksiste­rer der ingen særlig form for opnåelse af selvstæn­dig retssubjektivitet for hverken foreninger eller fonde.
In common law jurisdictions no special form of incorporation is available for either voluntary organizations or foundations.
Desuden kan de enkelte bestyrelsesmedlemmer eller formueforvaltere, i hvis navn foreningens virksomhed drives, være underkastet betænkeligt store erstatningsforpligtelser.
By far the most common is the socalled 'company limited by guarantee' - in effect a non profit-distributing company - but there are other forms available such as the 'housing association' or the socalled 'friendly society'.
I de fleste retssystemer har det imid­lertid vist sig, at foreninger uden selvstændig rets­subjektivitet ikke er forhindret i at være part i rets­sager som forening (dvs. under eget navn snarere end under et ansvarligt bestyrelsesmedlems navn).
There are also (comparatively rare) examples of charitable voluntary organizations and foundations which have been incorporated by Royal Charter or by special Act of Parliament.
Selvstændig retssubjektivitet på den ene eller anden måde er derfor mulig, men graden af rets­og handleevne er ikke altid lige stor.
Incorporation is available everywhere by one means or another, but the resulting degree of legal capacity is not always as great.
I nogle med­lemsstater er rets­ og handleevnen i realiteten ubegrænset (i det mindste så længe vedkommende organisation handler i overensstemmelse med sine vedtægter).
In a number of Member States legal capacity is effectively unlimited (in any event as long as the body concerned acts in accordance with its statutes).
I andre derimod må foreninger eller fonde hverken modtage gaver, testamentsarv eller eje fast ejendom uden udtrykkelig tilladelse fra den relevante offentlige myndighed.
In others, however, neither voluntary organizations nor foundations can receive gifts and legacies or own real property without the express permission of the relevant public authority.
I lande, der bygger på det civilretlige system, bliver foreningerne generelt selvstændige retssubjekter gennem offentliggørelse af vedtægterne i det rele­vante lands statstidende sammen med en forteg­nelse over (bestyrelses)­medlemmer.
Voluntary organizations may be incorporated or unincorporated and both forms are found in all jurisdictions.
Status som selvstændigt retssubjekt (eller mere præcist registrering, der er forudsætningen for den) kan afvises med den begrundelse, at organisationens vedtægter ikke opfylder loven.
There are some disadvantages to being unincorporated: it is not always easy for the voluntary organizations to acquire any assets it may need, and its individual board members or trustees, in whose names the business of the voluntary organization is carried on, may be uncomfortably exposed to liabilities.
At afvise registrering af en forening på grundlag af sådanne forhold er udelukkende et administrativt anliggende og indebærer ikke nogen politisk bedømmelse af organisationens status. Dette skal derfor nøje skelnes fra de tilfælde, hvor
In most places the law has, however, developed ways of mitigating the difficulties - by the use of the law of agency, for example, or by a common fund to which members contribute and to which creditors have first recourse, and in most jurisdictions the unincorporated voluntary organization does not appear to be prevented from taking part in a legal process as a voluntary organization (that is to say under its own name rather than that of a responsible board member).
Med hensyn til det vanskelige spørgsmål om i hvor stor udstrækning, foreninger og fonde (men især foreninger) har lov til at beskæftige sig med øko­nomisk aktivitet uden at miste skattemæssige pri­vilegier, er der ligeledes stor forskel.
There are differences too when it comes to the difficult question of the degree to which voluntary organizations and foundations (but in particular voluntary organizations) are allowed to engage in economic activity without the loss of tax privileges.
Nogen grad af økonomisk aktivitet er tilladt i alle medlemsstater­ne generelt på grundlag af en regel om, at en sådan aktivitet ikke må være foreningens hovedak­tivitet i den forstand, at aktiviteten ikke må udføres for sin egen skyld, men med et ideelt formål for øje, og den skal være en støtteaktivitet i forhold til
Some degree of economic activity is allowed in all Member States, the rule generally applied being that such activity must not be the voluntary organizations' principal activity in the sense that it must be carried out not for its own sake but for some nonprofit aim, and must be ancillary to the objects of the voluntary organizations in the sense that it must be directly tied to the voluntary or ganization's objects and not simply designed to improve the organization's general financial position.
lempelser eventuelt ophæves alene i henseende til de aktiviteter, der anses for at være overskudsgivende i den relevante betydning.
to be put towards the achievement of the voluntary organization's aims.
I nogle retssystemer er det muligt for en forening eller fond at supplere indkomsten ved at etablere eller anskaffe en helt separat erhvervsvirksomhed, der så overfører sin indkomst til moderorganisationen.
In some jurisdictions, it is possible for a voluntary organization or foundation to supplement its income by creating or acquiring an entirely separate commercial company which then remits its income to the parent body.
Hvad angår konkurrencereglerne, skal disse fuldt ud overholdes under hensyn til sektorens særlige forhold.
As far as competition rules are concerned, all com petition rules will be adhered to, taking into account the specificities of the sector.
Der er således store forskelle i omfanget af de skattelempelser, som foreninger og fonde, der arbejder på forskellige områder, er berettigede til.
There are thus considerable differences in the extent of tax relief for which voluntary organizations and foundations working in different fields are eligible.
Nogle retssystemer definerer almen interesse med skattelempelser for øje meget generelt og bredt, herunder eksempelvis enhver aktivitet, som offentligheden kan drage nytte eller fordel af.
Some jurisdictions define the area of public inter est for the purposes of tax relief very generally and broadly, including, for example, any activity of public utility or benefit.
I sådanne retssystemer kan alle organisationer, der opfylder dette brede kriterium, opnå fuld lem pelse.
Such jurisdictions typically give full relief to all bodies meeting this broad criterion.
Andre medlemsstater indtager en betydelig mere restriktiv holdning.
Other Member States take a much more restrictive approach.
I en af dem er det kun ganske få organisationer, der kan opnå skattelempelser. Disse organisationer er nævnt i loven.
In one, for example, reliefs are presently available only for a small number of individual organizations named by the law.
I atter andre medlemsstater kombineres en mere restriktiv metode med en metode, der også sondrer mellem forskellige typer af organisationer.
Yet other Member States take both a restrictive approach and one which also discriminates between differ ent sorts of bodies.
Resultatet kan således blive, at der kun kan opnås meget be grænsede skattelempelser for alle ideelle organisa tioner, hvorimod en højere grad af skattefritagelse indskrænkes til organisationer, der arbejder på et begrænset antal områder - typisk sundhed, kultur eller det sociale område.
Thus only very limited relief may be granted to all nonprofit bodies, fuller exemption being confined to bodies operating in a restricted number of fields - such, typically, as health, culture or social services - and subject to stringent management and accountability require ments.
Desuden er de underlagt strenge administrative og regnskabsmæssige krav. En sådan særlig skattemæssig status er underlagt et forvaltningsmæssigt og politisk skøn og gives I nogle medlemsstater i stadig sjældnere tilfælde.
Such special tax status is subject to administrative and political discretion and in some Member States appears to be increasingly rarely accorded.
Alle medlemsstater tillader nogle foreninger - i store træk dem, der anses for at have et almennyttigt formål - visse lempelser i den direkte skat enten ved at fritage dem for den skat, der er pålagt virksomheder og andre former for overskudsskabende foretagender, eller ved at påligne en lavere skatteprocent end den, virksomheder betaler, eller ved at fastsætte en indkomstsbundgrænse, op til hvilken der ikke skal betales skat.
All Member States allow some voluntary organizations — broadly speaking, those which are regard ed as having purposes in the public interest -some degree of relief from direct taxation either by exempting them from taxes imposed on com panies and other forms of profit-making enter prise, or by imposing a lower rate than that paid by companies, or by establishing a minimum income threshold below which tax is not incurred.
Sådanne former for lempelser udelukker ikke nødvendigvis hinanden.
These forms of relief are not necessarily mutually exclusive.