natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
It could not have been known in 2003 that they would not be drawn down.
aastal ei olnud võimalik teada, et laene ei kasutata.
The GBP 544 million NLF loan was granted at ‘25 basis points above LIBOR or relevant gilt’ [6].
NLFi laen summas 544 miljonit GBP anti LIBORist või asjaomasest riigivõlakirjast 25 baaspunkti kõrgema intressimääraga [6].
It should be noted that the reference rate is set at 75 points above an interbank swap rate.
Tuleb märkida, et viitemäär on 75 baaspunkti kõrgem pankadevaheliste vahetustehingute intressimäärast.
The UK authorities justified the low margin by reference to the security provided, namely the cash reserves of RM.
Ühendkuningriigi ametiasutused põhjendasid madalat marginaali tagatiseks seatud RMi sularahareserviga.
However, the Commission noted that these reserves constitute State resources over which the UK authorities had control through specific legislation.
Komisjon märkis aga, et kõnealune reserv on riigi ressurss, mille üle Ühendkuningriigi ametiasutustel on eriõigusaktide kaudu kontroll.
The Commission therefore questioned whether their use as security could necessarily dispel its doubts as to the aid character of the measure.
Seetõttu väljendas komisjon kahtlust, kas sularahareservi kasutamine tagatisena võiks igal juhul hajutada kahtlused, et meede kujutab endast riigiabi.
It noted that if the loan had been drawn down, a saving of 50 basis points would outweigh the value of the commitment fees which have been paid by RM.
Komisjon märkis, et kui laenu oleks kasutatud, ületaks 50 baaspunktist tulenev kokkuhoid RMi tasutud vahendustasu väärtuse.
The bonds of GBP 300 million and of GBP 200 million were issued at rates of 50 and 200 basis points above the ‘relevant gilt’.
Võlakirjad väärtusega 300 ja 200 miljonit GBP emiteeriti intressimääraga, mis oli „valitsuse asjaomase võlakirja” intressimäärast vastavalt 50 ja 200 baaspunkti kõrgemad.
The larger bond was secured by a floating charge over all assets of RM while the smaller one had lower security.
Suurema väärtusega võlakiri oli tagatud RMi koguvarale seatud muutuva väärtusega kommertspandiga, väiksema väärtusega võlakiri aga väiksema tagatisega.
The margin of 50 basis points above a rate based on Government securities (which are typically below interbank rates) implies the GBP 300 million loan may have been at a rate below the Commission’s reference rate.
Valitsuse väärtpaberite intressimääradest (mis tavaliselt on pankadevahelistest intressimääradest madalamad) 50 baaspunkti võrra kõrgem intressimäär tähendab, et 300 miljoni GBP suuruse laenu intressimäär võis olla komisjoni viitemäärast madalam.
The UK authorities informed the Commission on 31 October 2006 that the terms on which the 2003 loan facilities, still in existence in October 2006 (namely the GBP 544 million National Loan Fund loan and the GBP 300 million bond), were to be extended were still being negotiated but that they were seeking advice from consultants to ensure that the terms were commercial.
Ühendkuningriigi ametiasutused teatasid 31. oktoobril 2006 komisjonile, et 2003. aastal antud ja 2006. aasta oktoobris endiselt olemas olnud laenuvõimaluste (riikliku laenufondi laen 544 miljonit GBP ja võlakirjad 300 miljoni GBP ulatuses) pikendamise tingimusi alles räägitakse läbi, kuid nad küsivad nõustajatelt abi, et tagada kaubanduslike tingimuste kasutamine.
According to information provided by the UK authorities, one effect of the escrow account was to reduce the pensions contributions that RM has to make to the RMPP in order to address its deficit in the initial years.
Ühendkuningriigi ametiasutuste andmetel seisnes tingdeponeerimiskonto üks mõju asjaolus, et vähenesid RMi pensionikavasse esimestel aastatel tehtavad sissemaksed pensionikava puudujäägi kõrvaldamiseks.
The Commission noted that this was an indication that the measure may provide an advantage to RM and therefore constitute State aid.
Komisjoni arvates näitas see, et meede võib anda RMile eelise ja seega olla riigiabi.
The Commission had doubts about the argument that the measure can be justified as the intervention of a market economy investor, which had not been supported by projections or by financial analysis.
Komisjon kahtles väites, et meede on põhjendatav kui turumajandusliku investori sekkumine, mida prognoosid ega finantsanalüüs ei kinnitanud.
The Commission identified three issues it would be considering.
Komisjon määras kindlaks kolm uuritavat küsimust.
Given that the reserve funds within the reserve were already held within Royal Mail and on its balance sheet, one issue was whether the creation of the escrow account could be regarded as a commercial decision by RM in spite of the involvement of the UK authorities, which arose through the particular applicable legal regime.
Arvestades, et reservis olnud vahendid kuulusid juba Royal Mailile ja kajastusid tema bilansis, oli esimene küsimus, kas tingdeponeerimiskontot võis pidada RMi kaubanduslikuks otsuseks vaatamata Ühendkuningriigi ametiasutuste kaasatusele, mis tulenes kehtivast õiguskorrast.
A second issue, given the particular powers taken by the UK authorities over these reserves, was whether a shareholder acting commercially would agree to this use of shareholders’ equity.
Arvestades Ühendkuningriigi eriõigusi reservidele, oli teine küsimus, kas kaubanduslikult käituv aktsionär nõustuks aktsiakapitali seesuguse kasutamisega.
A third issue, given that the use of the reserves for the pensions measure requires the authorities to fund the POL measures from the State budget, was whether a shareholder would agree to bring new equity to fund an escrow account of this type.
Kuna reservide kasutamine pensionimeetme tarbeks eeldab, et ametiasutused rahastaksid POLi meetmeid riigieelarvest, oli kolmas küsimus, kas aktsionär nõustuks lisama uut omakapitali sellise tingdeponeerimiskonto rahastamiseks.
The terms of the loan had not been communicated to the Commission at the time of opening the investigation.
Laenu tingimusi ei oldud uurimise alustamise ajaks komisjonile teatatud.
The Commission was therefore unable to assess whether its terms included aid.
Seetõttu ei saanud komisjon hinnata, kas laenu tingimused hõlmavad riigiabi.
Given the fact that the loan was part of package of measures where the Commission had not allayed its doubts that State aid may be involved, the terms of the loan could not, in any case, be assessed independently.
Arvestades asjaolu, et laen moodustas ühe osa meetmete paketist, mille puhul komisjon ei olnud loobunud kahtlustest, et pakett võib sisaldada riigiabi, ei saanud laenu tingimusi ühelgi juhul eraldiseisvalt hinnata.
Compatibility of any State aid
Võimaliku riigiabi kokkusobivus ühisturuga
The Commission further expressed doubts whether, if they did constitute State aid, the measures could be found compatible with the common market.
Komisjon väljendas ka kahtlust, kas meetmed võiksid kokku sobida ühisturuga, juhul kui nende näol on tegemist riigiabiga.
It noted that the legal basis of Article 86(2) of the Treaty did not seem to be available even though RM is entrusted with services of general economic interest.
Komisjon märkis, et asutamislepingu artikli 86 lõike 2 õiguslik alus ei näi paika pidavat, ehkki RMile on antud üldist majandushuvi pakkuvate teenuste osutamine.
If State aid were involved, the Commission therefore doubted whether these measures would be compatible with the common market.
Kui tegemist on riigiabiga, siis komisjon kahtleb, kas meetmed sobiksid kokku ühisturuga.
Deutsche Post commented that the investigation covered only part of the aid granted to Royal Mail in recent years.
Deutsche Post märkis, et uurimine hõlmas vaid osa viimastel aastatel Royal Mailile antud abist.
The Commission had approved a whole series of UK aid measures resulting in Royal Mail being the largest aid recipient in the postal sector (after Poste Italiane) in recent years.
Komisjon oli heaks kiitnud terve rea Ühendkuningriigi abimeetmeid, mistõttu Royal Mail oli viimastel aastatel postisektori suurim abisaaja (pärast Poste Italianet).
DPAG pointed out that, despite all these measures, Royal Mail’s liberalised parcel delivery service provider, Parcelforce, was for many years heavily loss-making.
DP juhtis tähelepanu asjaolule, et kõikidele nimetatud meetmetele vaatamata oli Royal Maili liberaliseeritud postipakiteenuste osutaja Parcelforce olnud mitu aastat tugevas kahjumis.
Since Royal Mail had at the same time not earned sufficient revenue from its other businesses to offset these losses, they must necessarily be covered out of State resources.
Et Royal Mail ei olnud samal ajal teeninud teistelt tegevusvaldkondadelt piisavat tulu nimetatud kahjumi korvamiseks, tuleb kahjum kindlasti katta riigi ressurssidest.
According to the Commission’s decision of 19 June 2002 (case C 61/99, Deutsche Post AG [7]), such loss of compensation constitutes State aid incompatible with the common market.
Vastavalt komisjoni 19. juuni 2002. aasta otsusele (juhtum C 61/99, Deutsche Post AG [7]) on seda liiki kahju katmise puhul tegemist ühisturuga kokkusobimatu riigiabiga.
DPAG regretted that the Commission had not taken this fact, which DPAG already highlighted in its complaint of 3 December 2002, into account in these proceedings.
DP avaldas kahetsust, et komisjon ei olnud seda asjaolu, mida DP rõhutas juba 3. detsembri 2002. aasta kaebuses, menetlustes arvesse võtnud.
In respect of the 2001 loan, DP observed that in January 1999 Royal Mail acquired the German parcel service provider German Parcel GmbH (‘German Parcel’) for EUR 424 million.
aasta laenu kohta märkis DP, et 1999. aasta jaanuaris võttis Royal Mail 424 miljoni euro eest üle Saksamaa postipakiteenuse osutaja German Parcel GmbH („German Parcel”).
In the autumn of 1999 German Parcel GmbH became part of newly founded General Logistics System (‘GLS’).
German Parcel sai 1999. aasta sügisel äsja asutatud ettevõtja General Logistics Systems („GLS”) üheks osaks.
GLS went on to make numerous purchases in the European market.
Seejärel tegi GLS Euroopa turul mitu ülevõtutehingut.
During the period 2000-2003, Royal Mail generated hardly any profits from which to finance these acquisitions.
Aastatel 2000–2003 teenis Royal Mail vaevu kasumit, millest nimetatud ülevõtutehinguid rahastada.
If the loan financing these purchases was granted on terms which at that time were unobtainable on the market, then unlawful State aid would be involved which would have to be repaid.
Kui ülevõtutehinguid rahastanud laen anti tingimustel, mis ei olnud sel ajal turul kättesaadavad, oli tegemist ebaseadusliku riigiabiga ja see tuleb tagasi maksta.
In respect of the loan facilities, DPAG considered it hard to see why Royal Mail did not finance the renewal of its postal infrastructure out of its recent years’ revenues (according to its own figures, in the 2005/2006 financial year Royal Mail booked an operating profit of GBP 355 million).
Seoses laenuvõimalustega ei saanud DP aru, miks Royal Mail ei rahastanud oma postiinfrastruktuuri uuendamist viimaste aastate kasumist (RMi enda näitajate kohaselt teenis RM 2005/2006. majandusaastal 355 miljonit GBPd tegevuskasumit).
The regulator Postcomm had already taken the company’s universal service obligations extensively into account in its rate approvals.
Reguleeriv asutus Postcomm oli ettevõtja universaalteenuse osutamise kohustusi postiteenuste tasude kinnitamisel juba olulisel määral arvese võtnud.
It was therefore to be feared that the overall effect of the many support measures in the form of direct State payments, loans and approved pricing measures would be to overcompensate for the universal service costs in a way that is inadmissible under State aid rules.
Seetõttu oli karta, et paljude toetusmeetmete (riigi otsemaksete, laenude ja heakskiidetud hinnakujundusmeetmete) kogumõju tähendaks universaalteenuse kulude ülekompenseerimist viisil, mis on riigiabi eeskirjade kohaselt lubamatu.
This could appreciably affect competition in the letter, parcel and express courier market in the UK, where DPAG achieved a turnover in excess of EUR 1000 million in 2006.
See võib märgatavalt mõjutada konkurentsi Ühendkuningriigi kirjade, postipakkide ja kullerposti turul, kus DP käive ületas 2006. aastal 1000 miljonit eurot.
DPAG urged the Commission to subject the aid measures listed in the decision opening proceedings to a critical examination against the background of the numerous State support measures already approved for Royal Mail in particular.
DP ärgitas komisjoni kriitiliselt hindama menetluse algatamise otsuses loetletud abimeetmeid, võttes arvesse konkreetselt Royal Maili kasuks heakskiidetud arvukaid toetusmeetmeid.
In a first response to the opening of procedure, TNT Post UK Ltd (‘TNT’) fully supported the investigation as a Member of the Mail Competition Forum which had submitted a complaint on the pensions measure.
Esimeses vastuses menetluse algatamisele toetas TNT Post UK Ltd („TNT”) pensionimeetme kohta kaebuse esitanud Postikonkurentsi Foorumi liikmena uurimist täielikult.
As a market entrant, it was directly affected by any form of financing made on anything other than arms’ length, commercial terms.
Turule tulijana mõjutas TNTd otseselt igasugune rahastamine, mis toimus muudel kui reaalturupõhistel kaubanduslikel tingimustel.
Such financing would mean that Royal Mail is in a position to keep its prices artificially low, thus reducing TNT’s ability to compete.
Seda liiki rahastamine tähendaks, et Royal Mail saab oma hinnad kunstlikult madalal hoida, vähendades seega TNT konkurentsivõimet.
TNT further noted that, in a Royal Mail document dated March 2007, entitled ‘Royal Mail’s position on the interim review’, Royal Mail confirmed that re-financing was inter-dependent with settling price control and funding the pension deficit over 17 years.
Peale selle märkis TNT, et Royal Maili 2007. aasta märtsi dokumendis „Royal Maili seisukoht vahearuande kohta” kinnitas Royal Mail, et refinantseerimine on vastastikuses sõltuvuses hinnakontrolli saavutamisega ja pensionipuudujäägi rahastamisega 17 aasta jooksul.
TNT understood this to be an unduly long period and, if the financing were shown to be on non-commercial investor or lender terms then it would indicate this recovery period to be too long.
TNT arvates oli tegemist lubamatult pika ajavahemikuga ning kui näidatakse, et rahastamine toimub mittekaubandusliku investori või laenuandja tingimustel, näitaks see, et puudujäägi kõrvaldamise tähtaeg on liiga pikk.
Consequently, the price control caps set by the postal regulator Postcomm would have been set at too low a level.
Seega olnuksid postivaldkonda reguleeriva asutuse Postcomm kehtestatud hinnalaed liiga madalad.
As a competitor, TNT said it was directly impacted by price caps on business mail which were set at a level assuming government financing and an unduly long recovery period for the pension fund deficit.
Konkurendina väitis TNT, et talle avaldavad otsest mõju äriposti hinnalaed, mis on seatud tasemel, mis eeldab valitsusepoolset rahastamist ja pensionifondi puudujäägi lubamatult pikka kõrvaldamise tähtaega.
TNT made a further submission which arrived well after the official deadline for comments but which the Commission has nonetheless taken into account.
TNT tegi veel ühe avalduse, mis saabus märkuste esitamise ametlikust tähtajast oluliselt hiljem, kuid mida komisjon võttis siiski arvesse.
TNT had undertaken analysis of the two sources of government funding made available to Royal Mail, namely (i) loan financing and (ii) the release of government controlled reserves to an escrow account accessible by the Royal Mail pension fund trustees.
TNT oli analüüsinud Royal Mailile võimaldatud kaht riiklikku rahastamisallikat, nimelt i) laenud ja ii) valitsuse kontrolli all olevate reservide paigutamine tingdeponeerimiskontole, millele on juurdepääs Royal Maili pensionifondi usaldusisikutel.
TNT’s conclusion was that both sources of funding would not have been made by a commercial investor.
TNT järeldas, et kaubanduslik investor ei oleks võimaldanud kumbagi rahastamisallikat.
Concerning the 2001 loans, these were granted as unsecured loans in February 2001 with a duration close to, on average, 21 years and a fixed interest rate of, on average, 5,84 %.
aasta veebruaris antud laenud olid tagamata laenud keskmise tähtajaga 21 aastat ja keskmise fikseeritud intressimääraga 5,84 %.
In the month of issuance of the loans, the 20-year swap rate (versus GBP-LIBOR) ranged between 5,87 % and 6,12 %.
Laenude andmise kuul kõikus vahetustehingute 20 aasta intressimäär (erinevalt GBP LIBORist) vahemikus 5,87 % kuni 6,12 %.
From this, it could be derived that the State loans must have been concluded at a discount from the prevailing inter-bank rates while under normal circumstances corporate unsecured debt pays a credit spread above the inter-bank rates.
Sellest võib järeldada, et riiklikud laenud pidid olema antud pankadevahelistest intressimääradest soodsamalt, sest tavaliselt on ettevõtjatele antavate tagatiseta laenude krediidiriski marginaal pankadevahelistest intressimääradest kõrgem.
That this also holds for Royal Mail is proven by the credit spread of 0,25 % above LIBOR that commercial banks charged to Royal Mail for the loans with a much shorter duration.
Asjaolu, et see kehtib ka Royal Maili puhul, tõendab krediidiriski marginaal (0,25 % kõrgem kui LIBOR), mida kommertspangad kohaldasid Royal Mailile antud märksa lühemaajaliste laenude puhul.
TNT also noted that credit spreads increase significantly for longer maturities.
TNT märkis ka, et pikemate laenutähtaegade puhul on krediidiriski marginaalid oluliselt kõrgemad.
Based on the information available, they would conclude that a commercial party would not have entered into the GBP 500 million of loans with Royal Mail on the conditions published.
Olemasolevatel andmetel järeldaks TNT, et kaubanduslik laenuandja ei oleks Royal Mailile andnud avaldatud tingimustel laene summas 500 miljonit GBP.
In fact, a loan granted on arm’s length market terms would have yielded a substantially higher interest rate.
Reaalturupõhistel kaubanduslikel tingimustel antud laen oleks tegelikult pidanud olema märksa kõrgema intressimääraga.
With regard to the bonds issued in 2003 (that is, the loan facilities), TNT viewed the situation somewhat differently since it appeared that the bonds were secured by assets of Royal Mail.
Seoses 2003. aastal emiteeritud võlakirjadega (st laenuvõimalused) lähenes TNT olukorrale mõnevõrra teisiti, sest ilmnes, et võlakirjad olid tagatud Royal Maili varadega.
Depending on the strength of such assets (which, based on the information available, seemed to be rather strong) the spread over LIBOR would be expected to be reduced.
Olenevalt kõnealuste varade tugevusest (olemasolevatel andmetel näisid need üsna tugevad) võiks eeldada, et LIBORit ületav krediidiriski marginaal on väiksem.
Only the amount of such reduction would be questionable but since it was not clear to TNT what rate Royal Mail was actually paying, it was difficult to determine whether from a commercial perspective this can be justified by both Royal Mail and the UK Government.
Küsitav oleks vaid krediidiriski marginaali vähendamise ulatus, aga et TNT-le ei olnud selge, mis intressimäära Royal Mail tegelikult maksab, oli raske kindlaks teha, kas see oleks nii Royal Maili kui ka Ühendkuningriigi seisukohalt kaubanduslikust aspektist põhjendatud.
With regard to the loans issued in 2007, TNT noted that it was not possible to determine the commerciality of the terms because they were not public knowledge and, also, because the lending was apparently connected to the escrow account and existing loan facility.
Seoses 2007. aastal antud laenudega märkis TNT, et kõnealuste laenude tingimuste kaubanduslikkust ei ole võimalik kindlaks teha, sest tegemist ei olnud avaliku teabega ning ilmselt oli laenuandmine seotud ka tingdeponeerimiskonto ja olemasoleva laenuvõimalusega.
However, waiving default clauses under existing facilities (as was confirmed by the Royal Mail half-year regulatory accounts [8], at note 3 on page 18 ‘Royal Mail Group plc has net liabilities as at 24 September 2006, primarily as a result of the pension deficit within its main pension plan, the Royal Mail Pension Plan.
Olemasolevate laenuvõimaluste rikkumissätete kohaldamisest loobumine (mida kinnitas Royal Maili poolaasta raamatupidamisaruanne reguleerivale asutusele, [8] kolmas lisa, lk 18: „Seisuga 24. september 2006 ületavad Royal Mail Group plc kohustused varasid, seda peamiselt pensionipuudujäägi tõttu Royal Maili peamises pensionikavas.
Consequently, Royal Mail is in breach of its borrowing facilities with Government, but has received formal waivers from the Department of Trade and Industry, in its capacity as lender’) and granting additional loan finance was something a commercial party would not under normal circumstances do.
Selle tulemusena on Royal Mail jätnud täitmata oma kohustused seoses riigilt saadud laenuvõimalustega, kuid on saanud kaubandus- ja tööstusministeeriumilt kui laenuandjalt formaalseid vabastusi”) ning täiendavate laenude andmine on asi, mida kaubanduslik laenuandja tavalises olukorras ei teeks.
With respect to the pensions measure, TNT questioned whether, at the incorporation of Royal Mail in March 2001, the transfer of the non-business assets and related equity known as the ‘mails reserves’ was commercial.
Seoses pensionimeetmega kahtles TNT, kas äritegevusega mitteseotud varade ja nendega seotud omakapitali ehk „postireservi” üleandmine Royal Maili asutamisel 2001. aasta märtsis toimus kaubanduslikel tingimustel.
According to TNT, a commercial shareholder would very probably not have established a company which included a loan asset (where the debtor was the shareholder) and then provide a similar contribution in equity.
TNT arvates on väga tõenäoline, et kaubanduslik aktsionär ei oleks asutanud ettevõtjat, millel on laenuvara (mille puhul aktsionär on võlgnik) ja seejärel teinud samasugust sissemakset omakapitali.
TNT commented that when Netherlands operator KPN was ‘privatised’ in 1989, a similar arrangement had been in place but KPN’s opening balance sheet in 1989 as a Dutch NV did not contain either the associated assets or reserves.
TNT märkis, et kui Madalmaade ettevõtja KPN 1989. aastal „erastati”, oli olukord sarnane, kuid KPNi kui Madalmaade DV 1989. aasta algbilanss ei sisaldanud ei seotud varasid ega reserve.
According to TNT, the transfer into the escrow account by the UK authorities acts as a guarantee towards the pension trust, of which the benefit to Royal Mail would be that it is able to recover the deficit over a longer funding period and to use their own funds to strengthen their business.
TNT andmetel toimib Ühendkuningriigi ametiasutuste poolne ülekanne tingdeponeerimiskontole pensioni usaldusfondi tagatisena, tänu millele Royal Mail saab puudujäägi kõrvaldada pikema rahastamistähtaja jooksul ja kasutada oma vahendeid äritegevuse tugevdamiseks.
If Royal Mail had had to fund the deficit at once, depending on whether the pension liability in the balance sheet would already have reflected such deficit, they would have been confronted with a substantial loss and reduction of equity and, perhaps more importantly, a reduction of funds.
Kui Royal Mail pidanuks puudujääki kohe rahastama, siis olenevalt sellest, kas bilansis kajastuv pensionikohustus juba kajastas puudujääki, seisnuks ta silmitsi olulise kahjumiga ja omakapitali vähenemisega ning, mis ehk veelgi olulisem, võib-olla ka rahaliste vahendite vähenemisega.
In normal market conditions, if a company needs funds, it can borrow from the debt market or raise additional capital in the equity markets.
Tavalistel turutingimustel võib ettevõtja, kes vajab raha, laenata selle võlaturult või hankida lisakapitali aktsiaturgudelt.
In Royal Mail’s case, it appeared there was third possibility, namely, agreeing to a more lenient price cap in its price control with the regulator.
Royal Maili puhul näis olevat ka kolmas võimalus, nimelt leebemas hinnalaes kokkuleppimine reguleeriva asutusega.
Prices could increase by a substantial level without reaching abusively high levels.
Hinnad võivad tõusta olulisel määral ilma, et nad siiski tõuseksid vastuvõetamatult kõrgele.