natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Domstolen har i forskellige domme afholdt sig fra at betegne de omhandlede varer som lignende eller konkurrerende og blot fastslået, at der fandtes et i hvert fald potentielt eller indirekte konkurrenceforhold mellem dem.
In various judgments, the Court has refrained from classifying the products at issue as similar or in competition, and has merely acknowledged that they are at least potentially or indirectly in competition.
Jf. i denne retning domme af 27.2.1980, sag 168/78, Kommissionen mod Frankrig, sag 169/78, Kommissionen mod Italien, Sml. s. 385, og sag 171/78, Kommissionen mod Danmark, Sml. s. 447.
See, for example, Case 168/78, cited above; Case 169/78 Commission v Italy [1980] ECR 385; and Case 171/78 Commission v Denmark [1980] ECR 447.
Jf. bl.a. den senere dom af 18.4.1991, sag C-230/89, Kommissionen mod Grækenland, Sml. I, s. 1909.
For a more recent example, see Case C-230/89 Commission v Greece [1991] ECR I-1909.
FORSLAG TIL AFGØRELSE FRA GENERALADVOKAT MENGOZZI — SAG C-167/05 hvilken kategori af vine der faktisk konkurrerer med øl på det svenske marked, både med hensyn til alkoholindholdet (Kommissionen mener 8,5-15% vol. og den svenske regering 11% vol.) og prisklassen, er de dog grundlæggende enige om, at de omhandlede varer til en vis grad kan erstatte hinanden.
OPINION OF MR MENGOZZI — CASE C-167/05 beer on the Swedish market, both when identifying it on the basis of alcoholic strength by volume (8.5 % vol. to 15 % vol. in the Commission’s view and 11 % vol. in the view of the Swedish Government) or on the basis of price range, there is none the less substantial agreement in principle that the products at issue are to some extent interchangeable.
produktionsmetoder (vin er primært et landbrugsprodukt og som sådan underlagt klimabetingede risici, mens øl hovedsageligt er et industriprodukt) og prisstruktur.
strength), production methods (wine is essentially an agricultural product and, as such, subject to the vicissitudes of climate, whereas beer is largely an industrial product) and price structure.
Domstolen har i betragtning af disse forskelle, og fordi vine er meget forskellige hvad angår særpræg, kvalitet og priser, bemærket, at konkurrenceforholdet mellem de pågældende drikkevarer med henblik på den afgiftsmæssige sammenligning udelukkende skal fastslås på grundlag af »de vine, der er mest tilgængelige for det store publikum, og det vil i almindelighed sige de letteste og billigste vine« 19.
Those differences — as well as the fact that a great variety of wines exist, in terms of characteristics, quality and price — led the Court to consider that the competitive relationship between the beverages at issue that is material for the purposes of a fiscal comparison must be viewed as restricted, and to accept it solely for ‘those wines which are the most accessible to the public at large, that is to say, generally speaking, the lightest and least expensive varieties.’ 19
Den første betingelse for, at artikel 90, stk. 2, kan finde anvendelse, er dermed opfyldt.
The first condition for the applicability of the second paragraph of Article 90 EC is therefore satisfied.
Parterne i den foreliggende sag er enige om, at vin hovedsageligt er en importeret vare, hvorimod øl primært er en indenlandsk fremstillet vare.
In the circumstances forming the subjectmatter of this case, it is common ground that wine is mainly an imported product, whereas beer is mainly a domestic product.
For at efterprøve, om en bestemt national afgiftsordning er forenelig med artikel 90 EF, er det dernæst nødvendigt at sammenligne de afgiftsregler, som de omhandlede varer er underlagt, og klarlægge, om de beskattes forskelligt og i hvilket omfang.
In order to ascertain whether a specific national fiscal provision is compatible with Article 90 EC, it is necessary next to compare the tax arrangements to which the products at issue are subject, in order to identify any difference in the taxation applicable to them and to determine the extent of that difference.
Hvis sammenligningen som her omfatter varer, der som følge af deres egenskaber er meget forskellige, om end de til dels kan erstatte hinanden, kan det i visse tilfælde være særdeles vanskeligt at fastlægge kriterier, der gør det muligt at foretage en korrekt sammenligning.
If, as in the present case, the comparison is between products with characteristics that render them largely dissimilar, even though they may be in part interchangeable, it may, in certain cases, prove particularly difficult to identify the criteria that will facilitate a proper comparison.
Den sagsøgte regering har heller ikke bestridt Kommissionens påstand om, at det svenske marked ikke udviser sådanne særegenheder, at det ikke er muligt at fastslå, at der består et konkurrenceforhold som det, Domstolen allerede har påpeget, mellem vine i den billigste kategori og stærkøl, som er de varer, der tegner sig for den største procentdel af de respektive markeder.
Furthermore, the Swedish Government raises no argument against the Commission’s claim that the Swedish market does not display features which would preclude recognition of a competitive relationship — of the kind the Court has already accepted — between wines in the cheaper bracket and strong beer, that is to say, products which have the largest percentage shares of the relevant markets.
Selv om parterne har forskellige opfattelser af,
Although there are some differences of opinion between the parties when it comes to identifying the category of wines which is actually in competition with
19 — Dom af 12.7.1983, sag 170/78, Kommissionen mod Det Forenede Kongerige, Sml. s. 2265, præmis 12.
19 — Case 170/78 Commission v United Kingdom [1983] ECR 2265, paragraph 12.
Jf. også dommen i sagen Kommissionen mod Belgien, præmis 11, og dom af 17.6.1999, sag C-166/98, Socridis, Sml. I, s. 3791.
See also Case 356/85, cited above, paragraph 11, and Case C-166/98 Socridis [1999] ECR I-3791.
I dommen i sagen om Det Forenede Kongeriges afgiftsordning for vin udtalte
In its judgment on the arrangements for taxing wine in the United Kingdom, the
Domstolen, at det var mest hensigtsmæssigt som metode til at vurdere afgiftsforholdet mellem øl og vin at sammenligne afgiftsbyrden i forhold til tre forskellige faktorer, nemlig produkternes volumen, alkoholindhold og pris 20.
Court held that the most appropriate method for assessing the taxation relationship between beer and wine required a comparison of the tax burden by reference to three different factors: volume, alcoholic strength and product price. 20
Hvad angår forskellen i punktafgift i forhold til alkoholprocent beskattes en vin med et alkoholindhold på 12,5% vol. ca. 20% højere pr. volumenprocent alkohol end øl (1,77 mod 1,47 SEK) og en vin med et alkoholindhold på 11% vol. ca. 36% højere (2 mod 1,47 SEK).
As regards the difference in taxation by reference to alcoholic strength, a wine with an alcoholic strength of 12.5 % vol. is taxed by volume of alcohol at a rate some 20 % higher than beer (SEK 1.77 as compared with SEK 1.47), and a wine with an alcoholic strength of 11 % vol. at a rate some 36 % higher (SEK 2 as compared with SEK 1.47).
En endnu lettere vin med et alkoholindhold på 10% vol. beskattes næsten 50% højere end øl pr. volumenprocent alkohol.
A still lighter wine, with an alcoholic strength of 10 % vol., is taxed by volume of alcohol at a rate almost 50 % higher than beer.
Det er næsten overflødigt at nævne, at alkoholindholdet klart er det bedst egnede vurderingsparameter i den foreliggende sag, da det benyttes som beregningsgrundlag for punktafgiften.
It is scarcely necessary to point out that alcoholic strength is certainly the most pertinent assessment criterion in the present case, since it is used as the tax base for determining excise duty.
Sammenligner man afgiftsniveauet i forhold til volumen 21, og idet bemærkes, at punktafgiften for en liter øl med et gennemsnitligt alkoholindhold (5,2% vol.) 22udgør 7,64 SEK 23, og punktafgiften for en liter vin med et alkoholindhold på over 8,5% og højst 15% vol. udgør 22,08 SEK, fremgår det, at afgiften på vin sat i relation til volumen er ca. tre 24gange højere end afgiften på øl. Dette resultat er dog mindre relevant i den foreliggende sag, eftersom der normalt vil være forskel på den volumenrelaterede beskatning i et system, hvor afgiften beregnes ud fra alkoholindholdet.
If we compare the rates of taxation by reference to volume, 21 then given that the tax on a litre of beer of average alcoholic strength (5.2 % vol.) 22is SEK 7.64 23and the rate of tax on a litre of wine of alcoholic strength between 8.5 % vol. and 15 % vol. is SEK 22.08, then the rate at which wine is taxed by volume is approximately three 24times higher than that of beer.
20 — Dommen af 12.7.1983 i sagen Kommissionen mod Det Forenede Kongerige, nævnt ovenfor i fodnote 19, præmis 18.
20 — Case 170/78, cited above, paragraph 18.21 — Assuming identical volume for both beverages.
22 — Både Kommissionen og den svenske regering er gået ud fra dette alkoholindhold for øl.
22 — This is the alcoholic strength by volume to which both the Commission and the Swedish Government refer for beer.
Det er vanskeligere at afgøre, hvilken indvirkning afgifterne har på de omhandlede varers slutpris.
It is more difficult to make a comparative assessment of the effect of the tax on the final price of the products at issue.
Det hænger især sammen med, at parterne er uenige om, hvilke priser der skal lægges til grund for beregningen. Kommissionen, der støtter sig på Systembolagets officielle statistik, mener, at det relevante prisinterval, som tegner sig for ca. 79% af vinsalget, ligger på 41-70 SEK for en flaske på 75 cl (55-93 SEK for en liter).
That difficulty basically arises as a result of the disagreement between the parties as to which prices should be used as a basis for calculation.
Den svenske regering mener derimod, at det er mere korrekt at gå ud fra en gennemsnitlig salgspris på 69,58 SEK for en liter vin med et alkoholindhold på
The average price to the consumer of a litre of wine with an alcoholic strength of 12.5 % vol. is stated to be SEK 65.33, whereas the average price to the consumer of a litre of
For at efterprøve, om en national afgiftsordning overholder forbuddet i artikel 90 EF, skal det endelig undersøges, om der foreligger bevis for, at denne ordning er diskriminerende.
In order to determine whether national tax arrangements are compatible with the prohibition under Article 90 EC, it is lastly necessary to show that the arrangements are discriminatory in nature.
Domstolen har vedrørende dette punkt med hensyn til artikel 90, stk. 1, præciseret, at det netop er den forskellige beskatning, der bevirker, at afgifterne er diskriminerende, eftersom forbuddet i denne bestemmelse, som gælder for lignende og i vidt omfang sammenlignelige varer, finder anvendelse på tilfælde, hvor et afgiftssystem rammer en indført vare hårdere end en indenlandsk vare.
In that regard, the Court has made clear that, so far as the first paragraph of Article 90 EC is concerned, discrimination results automatically from the difference in taxation, since, in the case of similar products which are broadly comparable, the prohibition laid down in that provision applies as soon as an imported product is taxed more heavily than a domestic product.
Derimod skal vurderingen i det i stk. 2 omhandlede tilfælde, netop på grund af vanskeligheden ved at foretage tilstrækkeligt nøjagtige sammenligninger mellem de pågældende produkter, ifølge Domstolen baseres på et videre kriterium, nemlig det pågældende afgiftssystems indirekte beskyttelsesvirkning 27.
However, as regards the second paragraph of Article 90 EC, given the difficulty in making a sufficiently precise comparison of the products at issue, that assessment must, according to the Court, be conducted on the basis of a more general criterion, that is to say, the indirectly protectionist nature of the fiscal provision at issue. 27 beer with an alcoholic strength of 5.2 % vol. is SEK 30.33.
Denne bedømmelse er uden tvivl den vanskeligste af de bedømmelser, der skal foretages inden for rammerne af artikel 90
That assessment is without doubt the trickiest assessment to be made under Article 90 EC and, in the context of infringe-
Uanset hvilket sammenligningsparameter der lægges til grund, fremgår det af de nævnte tal, at de vinkategorier, der konkurrerer med øl, pålægges en langt højere punktafgift end øl.
Whatever criterion for comparison is used, the above figures show that the categories of wine that are in competition with beer are subject to a significantly higher rate of tax than beer.
25 — Denne pris svarer til gennemsnitsprisen for de 22 mest solgte vine i flaske eller papemballage i prisintervallet 61-70 SEK, som tegner sig for størstedelen af salget.
25 — That price is derived from the average of the prices of the 22 wines, purchased in bottles or wine boxes, which are most widely sold in the price bracket ranging from SEK 61 to SEK 70, which accounts for the bulk of sales.
27 — Dommen af 27.2.1980 i sagen Kommissionen mod Det Forenede Kongerige, nævnt ovenfor i fodnote 16, præmis 9.
27 — Case 170/78, cited above, paragraph 9, see also the earlier judgment in Case 27/67, cited above.
Jf. den tidligere Fink Frucht-dom (jf. fodnote 14 ovenfor). Da der i retspraksis har været en tendens til at anlægge en helhedsvurdering ud fra artikel 90 EF i stedet for at skelne klart mellem anvendelsen af stk. 1 og stk. 2 (jf. fodnote 15 ovenfor), må det imidlertid fastslås, at det afgørende kriterium for, om denne bestemmelse er blevet tilsidesat, er, om den omtvistede afgiftsordning har beskyttende virkning.
However, the tendency within the caselaw to ‘generalise’ the assessment under Article 90 EC, without making a clear distinction between the application of the first or second paragraph thereof (see footnote 15 above) means that the protectionist effect of the tax arrangements at issue is regarded as the main criterion for determining whether that provision has been infringed.
26 — Den gennemsnitlige forbrugerpris udgør 30,33 SEK for en liter øl med et alkoholindhold på 5,2%.
26 — Average price to the consumer of SEK 30.33 for a litre of beer with an alcoholic strength of 5.2 % vol.
EF, og den kan under en traktatbrudsprocedure indebære, at Kommissionen pålægges en bevisbyrde, som denne vil have svært ved at løfte.
COMMISSION v SWEDEN ment proceedings, may place on the Commission a burden of proof which it is hard to satisfy.
Domstolen har med henblik på at lempe denne bevisbyrde præciseret, at det for anvendelsen af artikel 90, stk. 2, EF er tilstrækkeligt, at det fastslås, at en nærmere bestemt afgiftsordning »på grund af sin udformning må antages at kunne indebære den beskyttelsesvirkning, som traktaten sigter til« 28. Domstolen har videre bemærket, at »[u]den at betydningen af de bedømmelsesgrundlag, det er muligt at tilvejebringe gennem statistiske oplysninger vedrørende en nærmere angivet afgiftsbestemmelses virkning […], underkendes, kan det ikke af Kommissionen kræves, at den fremlægger tal for, hvori den omtvistede afgiftsordnings beskyttelsesvirkning nærmere består« 29.
In an attempt to alleviate that burden, the Court has specified that, for the purposes of applying the second paragraph of Article 90 EC, it is sufficient to establish that a particular taxation system ‘is likely, in view of its inherent characteristics, to bring about the protective effect referred to by the Treaty.’ 28The Court went on to state that ‘[w]ithout … disregarding the importance of the criteria which may be derived from statistics from which the effects of a given taxation system may be measured, it is impossible to require the Commission to supply statistical data on the actual foundation of the protective effect of the tax system complained of.’ 29
Kongeriget Sverige har med henvisning til denne tidligere dom gjort gældende, at Kommissionen ikke har løftet sin bevisbyrde i den foreliggende sag, da den ikke har taget hensyn til den store forskel i prisen på de to varer, som burde have fået den til at konkludere, at den forskellige beskatning af disse varer ikke kunne påvirke forbrugernes valg.
Relying on that precedent, the Kingdom of Sweden is maintaining, in the present case, that the Commission has failed to satisfy the burden of proof incumbent upon it, since it has failed to take account of the significant price difference between the two products at issue, which would have led it to rule out the possibility that the difference in the taxes applicable to those products exerts any influence on consumer choice.
I dommen i sagen om den belgiske afgiftsordning for vin og øl afviste Domstolen imidlertid Kommissionens antagelse om, at enhver forskel i afgiftssatsen, anvendt på samme beregningsgrundlag, er i strid med artikel 90, stk. 2, EF, når konkurrenceforholdet mellem to varer er fastslået, og den præciserede, at afgørelsen af, om en bestemt
In its judgment on the tax arrangements for wine and beer in Belgium, however, the Court rejected the Commission’s argument that once a competitive relationship is established between two products, any difference in the rates of tax applied to the same basis of assessment is contrary to the second paragraph of Article 90 EC, and explained that any assessment of the compatibility of a given tax with the second paragraph of Article 90 EC ‘must take account of the impact of that tax on the competitive relationship between the
Da der er tale om den svenske regerings hovedargument, som udgør kernen i dens forsvar, vil jeg først undersøge, om det er berettiget, før jeg går videre med vurderingen. Det er i denne sammenhæng
As regards the central argument which the Swedish Government advances and which is the mainstay of its defence, I consider it appropriate, before taking my
28 — Dommen af 27.2.1980 i sagen Kommissionen mod Det Forenede Kongerige, præmis 10, min fremhævelse.
28 — Case 170/78, cited above, paragraph 10.
29 — Dommen af 27.2.1980 i sagen Kommissionen mod Det Forenede Kongerige, præmis 10.
Emphasis added.29 — Case 170/78, cited above, paragraph 10.
FORSLAG TIL AFGØRELSE FRA GENERALADVOKAT MENGOZZI — SAG C-167/05 liggende sag, hvilket Kongeriget Sverige har foreslået.
OPINION OF MR MENGOZZI — CASE C-167/05 analysis any further, to consider whether that argument is well founded.
nødvendigt kort at skitsere baggrunden for den dom, som Kongeriget Sverige har påberåbt sig, og den løsning, Domstolen nåede frem til.
To that end, it is necessary to call to mind briefly the context of the judgment on which the Kingdom of Sweden’s plea is based, as well as the conclusion which the Court reached on that occasion.
Den belgiske regering oplyste, at literprisen på øl, inkl. afgifter, udgjorde 29,75 BFR, mens prisen på en liter vin af tilsvarende kvalitet udgjorde 125 BFR.
The Belgian Government contended that the price of a litre of beer, inclusive of taxes, amounted to BEF 29.75 and that the price of a litre of wine of comparable quality was BEF 125.
Da alle Kommissionens argumenter for, at disse oplysninger var forkerte, blev afvist, må det konkluderes, at Domstolen baserede sin vurdering på de samme oplysninger.
Since the Commission’s arguments challenging those facts were rejected in their entirety, it must be inferred that the Court based its analysis on those facts.
Den belgiske forbrugerpris for vin, inkl. moms, var således fire gange 33højere end for øl, mens forskellen i momssatserne for henholdsvis vin og øl som ovenfor nævnt var på 6% (25% for vin og 19% for øl).
The selling price to the consumer of wine in Belgium, inclusive of VAT, was therefore almost four times 33that of beer, whereas the difference between the VAT rates applied to wine and beer respectively was, as we have seen, 6 % (25 % for wine and 19 % for beer).
I den konkrete sag, der resulterede i denne dom, foreholdt Kommissionen Kongeriget Belgien, at det anvendte en momssats, der var ca. 6% højere for vin end for øl.
In the circumstances of the case which gave rise to that judgment, the Commission imputed to the Kingdom of Belgium the application of a rate of VAT on wine some 6 % higher than the rate on beer.
Domstolen konkluderede som resultat af sin undersøgelse, at den omhandlede afgiftsforskel ikke ville kunne påvirke forbrugernes valg.
On conclusion of its analysis, the Court found that the difference between the rates of tax applied was not such as to influence consumer choice.
Domstolen fastslog navnlig, at Kommissionen ikke havde godtgjort, at prisforskellen mellem de konkurrerende øl- og vintyper var så lille, at forskellen på 6% i momssatserne for de to varer ville kunne påvirke forbrugernes adfærd, således at der kunne være tale om protektionistiske virkninger til fordel for øl 32.
In particular, the Court considered that the Commission had failed to demonstrate that the difference between the respect- ive prices for the beer and wine in competition with each other was so small that the 6 % difference between the VAT rates applied to the two products was in fact capable of influencing consumer behaviour and thus giving rise to a protectionist effect in favour of beer. 32
Generaladvokat Vilaça gjorde i sit forslag til afgørelse 34, som Domstolen i det store og hele fulgte på dette punkt, opmærksom på, at hvis man havde anvendt en ensartet momssats på 25% og dermed hævet momsen på øl med 6%, ville prisforskellen mellem de to varer blive reduceret med 1,5 BFR (fra 95,25 til 93,75 BFR), og hvis man havde anvendt en ensartet sats på 19% og dermed nedsat satsen for vin, ville det have reduceret forskellen med 6 BFR (fra 95,25 til 89,25 BFR).
In his Opinion, 34 which the Court largely followed on this point, Advocate General Vilaça pointed out that if the VAT rate were standardised at 25 %, thereby increasing the rate applied to beer by 6 percentage points, the difference in price between the two products would decrease by BEF 1.5 (from BEF 95.25 to BEF 93.75), whereas if the rate were standardised at 19 % — that is to say, by reducing the rate applied to wine — the reduction would have amounted to BEF 6 (from BEF 95.25 to BEF 89.25).
Prisforskellen mellem vin og øl ændrede sig ikke
In neither case did the price relationship between wine
Det er nødvendigt at gennemgå oplysningerne i sagen nærmere for bedre at kunne forstå rækkevidden af de konklusioner, Domstolen nåede frem til, og for at afgøre, om den samme løsning bør vælges i den fore-
A more detailed analysis of the facts of the case allows us to comprehend better the significance of the conclusion which the Court reached and to assess whether, as the Kingdom of Sweden suggests, it is appropriate to transpose to the present case the approach adopted in that earlier case.
33 — 4,2 gange.
33 — 4.2 times.
Ser man på prisen uden moms (100 BFR for vin og 25 BFR for øl), var vin nøjagtig fire gange dyrere end øl.
Considering the prices net of VAT (BEF 100 for wine and BEF 25 for beer), the differential was precise- ly 1 : 4.
34 — Fremsat den 26.2.1987 i sagen Kommissionen mod Belgien, Sml. s. 3299, punkt 102 ff.
34 — Opinion delivered on 26 February 1987 in Case 356/85, cited above, [1987] ECR 3299, point 102 et seq.
Prisforskellen mellem vin og øl vil mindskes med 11,8%, men vin vil stadig være ca. dobbelt så dyr 38.
The price ratio between wine and beer would decrease by 11.8 %, although continuing to be of the order of 2 : 1.
særlig meget i nogen af tilfældene (-1,5% ved en ensartet sats på 25% og -6,3% ved en ensartet sats på 19%).
38 and beer undergo significant change (-1.5 % if the rate were standardised at 25 %, and -6.3 % if the rate were standardised at 19 %).
I det første tilfælde, som var det mest realistiske i lyset af den belgiske regerings udtalelser under sagen, ville prisen på en liter øl stige med 5%, hvorimod prisen på en liter vin i det andet tilfælde ville falde med 4,8% 35.
In the former case, which had to be regarded as the most likely in view of the statements issued by the Belgian Government in the course of the proceedings, the price of a litre of beer would have increased by 5 %, whereas, in the latter case, the price of a litre of wine would have fallen by 4.8 %. 35