natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
In this respect, the Commission concludes that the sale of the Facility to Hammar involved State resources.
Sellega seoses leiab komisjon, et rajatise müügil Hammarile kaasati riigi vahendeid.
Since the transaction benefited a specific undertaking (i.e. Hammar), it has to be considered a selective measure.
Kuna tehingust sai kasu konkreetne ettevõtja (Hammar), tuleb seda käsitada valikulise meetmena.
The measure distorts or has the potential to distort competition and affect trade within the Union and the European Economic Area (‘EEA trade’) within the meaning of the State aid case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union.
Meede moonutab või võib moonutada konkurentsi ja mõjutada kaubandust liidus ja Euroopa Majanduspiirkonnas (edaspidi „EMP kaubandus”) vastavalt Euroopa Kohtu praktikale riigiabi küsimustes.
In order to maintain that the selective advantage entailed in the sale of the Facility to Hammar had no or an insignificant effect on trade, the report prepared by Copenhagen Economics (see recital 30) argues that the real estate market in which Hammar is active is purely local.
Konsultatsioonifirma Copenhagen Economics koostatud aruandes (vt põhjendus 30) on väidetud, et Hammar tegutseb ainult kohalikul kinnisvaraturul ning seetõttu rajatise müügiga talle antud valikuline eelis ei avaldanud kaubandusele mingit mõju või oli selle mõju väike.
However, the potential effect on trade does not depend on whether a particular aid recipient happens to be active internationally or only nationally, but on whether the goods or services in which he trades are or could be subject to intra-Union trade [11].
Kuid võimalik mõju kaubandusele ei sõltu sellest, kas abisaaja tegutseb rahvusvahelises ulatuses või ainult riigisiseselt, vaid sellest, kas tema pakutavate kaupade või teenustega kaubeldakse või võidakse kaubelda liidusiseselt [11].
That criterion is met in this case, given that real estate and real-estate-related services are subject to intra-Union trade and investment, a fact which, in the present case, is substantiated by the fact that the previous owner of the Facility (Chips AB) is the Finnish-based subsidiary of Orkla, a group with international operations.
Käesolev juhtum vastab sellele kriteeriumile, kuna kaubandus kinnisvarateenuste ja kinnisvaraga ning neisse investeerimine on üleliiduline, millest annab käesoleval juhul tunnistust ka see, et rajatise eelmine omanik Chips AB oli rahvusvaheliselt tegutseva kontserni Orkla tütarettevõtja Soomes.
This constitutes evidence of cross-border interest in the asset in question, i.e. the Facility, which, moreover, is not an empty plot of land but an operational production facility for frozen foodstuffs.
See tõestab, et käesoleva juhtumi raames käsitletav vara, st rajatis, mis ei ole tühi krunt, vaid tegutsev rajatis, kus toodetakse külmutatud toiduaineid, pakub piiriülest huvi.
Therefore, the Commission is of the view that, even if Hammar operates exclusively at local level, the company is active in a market where an effect on intra-Union and EEA trade and competition cannot be ruled out.
Seetõttu on komisjon arvamusel, et kuigi Hammar tegutseb ainult kohalikul tasandil, osaleb ta siiski sellisel turul, kus ta võib mõjutada liidusisest ja EMP kaubandust.
The arguments put forward by Hammar thus give the Commission no reason to depart from the preliminary findings of the opening decision on this criterion.
Seetõttu ei saa komisjon Hammari esitatud argumentide põhjal loobuda kõnealuse kriteeriumi alusel tehtud esialgsetest järeldustest, mis on esitatud menetluse algatamise otsuses.
The advantage
Saadud eelis
The sole criterion of the State aid definition under discussion, therefore, is whether FABV’s sale of the Facility conferred an advantage on Hammar.
Seega on ainuke kriteerium riigiabi olemasolu kindlakstegemiseks see, kas rajatise müügiga FABV-lt Hammarile loodi viimasele eeliseid.
On the basis of the information available, the Commission is of the view that FABV sold the Facility to Hammar at a price below its market value, which a private market investor is unlikely to do, thereby granting an advantage to Hammar.
Olemasoleva teabe põhjal on komisjon seisukohal, et FABV müüs rajatise Hammarile turuhinnast odavamalt, mida turutingimustes tegutsev erainvestor arvatavasti ei teeks. Sellega loodi Hammarile eelis.
The present case concerns the sale of certain assets in public ownership to a private undertaking.
Käesoleva juhtumi raames käsitletakse avaliku sektori teatava vara müüki eraettevõtjale. Osa varast on kinnisvara (maa ja ehitised).
Some of those assets are real estate (land and buildings) and to assess the presence of aid in those cases the Commission applies the Commission Communication on State aid elements in sales of land and buildings by public authorities [12] (‘the Communication’).
Riigiabi olemasolu kindlakstegemiseks kohaldab komisjon oma teatist ametiasutuste korraldatavas maa ja hoonete müügis sisalduvate riigiabi elementide kohta [12] (edaspidi „teatis”).
When the sale concerns other types of assets, the Commission applies the test of the private operator in a market economy, i.e. it assesses whether the public seller behaved as a private investor operating in a market economy.
Müügiga hõlmatud muud liiki vara kohta teeb komisjon turumajanduse tingimustes tegutseva erainvestori testi, st hindab, kas avalikku sektorisse kuuluv müüja toimis nii, nagu toimiks erainvestor turumajanduse tingimustes.
However, since the Communication is based on the same private investor test, for ease of presentation, the Commission will refer to that Communication to assess the whole transaction [13].
Kuna ka teatises lähtutakse samast testist, viitab komisjon tehingu hindamisel lihtsuse huvides kõnealusele teatisele [13].
In particular, in accordance with point II.1 of the Communication, the existence of State aid in favour of the buyer is automatically ruled out when the sale follows ‘a sufficiently well-publicised, open and unconditional bidding procedure, comparable to an auction, accepting the best or only bid’.
Teatise punkti II.1 kohaselt ei saa ostja automaatselt riigiabi, kui müük toimub pärast piisavalt hästi avaldatud, avalikku ja tingimusteta pakkumismenetlust, mis on võrreldav enampakkumisega ning kus võetakse vastu parim või ainus pakkumine.
Hammar argues that the price of SEK 8 million reflects the market value of the Facility because at the time the option was agreed there were no other bids.
Hammar väidab, et hind (8 miljonit Rootsi krooni) vastab rajatise turuväärtusele, kuna optsiooni kokkuleppimise ajal puudusid muud pakkumused.
The Commission notes, however, that the Municipality’s sale of the Facility was not transparent and open to other bidders.
Komisjon märgib, et vald ei müünud rajatist teiste pakkujate jaoks läbipaistva ja avatud menetlusega.
Consequently, the price at which it was sold does not allow the Commission to draw any conclusion as to its genuine market value [14].
Seega ei saa komisjon müügihinna alusel teha järeldusi tegeliku turuväärtuse kohta [14].
In addition, the Commission notes that FABV purchased the Facility for SEK 17 million on 13 February 2008, and on the same date agreed to provide a purchase option to Hammar for the much lower price of SEK 8 million.
Lisaks märgib komisjon, et FABV ostis rajatise 17 miljoni Rootsi krooniga 13. veebruaril 2008 ning leppis Hammariga veel samal päeval kokku märksa odavama hinnaga (8 miljonit Rootsi krooni) väljaostu võimaluse.
Point II.2(a) of the Communication further provides that, if the sale takes place without an unconditional bidding procedure, ‘an independent evaluation should be carried out by one or more independent asset valuers prior to the sale negotiations in order to establish the market value on the basis of generally accepted market indicators and valuation standards’.
Teatise punktis II.2.a on sätestatud, et tingimusteta pakkumismenetluseta müügi puhul peaks enne müügiläbirääkimisi üks või mitu sõltumatut varade hindajat andma sõltumatu hinnangu, et leida turuhind üldtunnustatud turunäitajate ja hindamisstandardite alusel.
The Commission notes that FABV did not request any independent evaluation of the Facility prior to the sale negotiations.
Komisjon märgib, et FABV ei taotlenud rajatise sõltumatut hindamist enne müügiläbirääkimiste algust.
However, notwithstanding the absence of an open and unconditional bidding procedure and of an independent evaluation prior to the sale negotiations, the market value of the Facility as it was sold by FABV to Hammar can be inferred from other information available.
Kuid hoolimata sellest, et müük ei toimunud avatud ja tingimusteta pakkumismenetlusega ning enne müügiläbirääkimisi ei tehtud sõltumatut hindamist, saab rajatise FABV-lt Hammarile müümise aegse turuväärtuse üle otsustada muu teabe alusel.
Indeed, when the Facility was put up for sale in late 2007, Chips AB commissioned Colliers International [15] to draw up a memorandum of sale for the Facility.
aasta lõpul, rajatise müükipaneku ajal, tellis Chips AB ettevõtjalt Colliers International [15] memo rajatise müügi kohta.
Colliers International indicated a sale price of SEK 27 million (EUR 2,7 million) for the real estate alone, i.e. not including movable property and intellectual property rights.
Colliers Internationali hinnangul ulatus üksnes kinnisvara (ilma vallasvara ja intellektuaalomandi õigusteta) müügihind 27 miljoni Rootsi kroonini (2,7 miljonit eurot).
As noted in the opening decision, the Commission believes this to constitute a reasonable estimate of the market price because (i) the estimate was obtained prior to the sale negotiations; (ii) it was commissioned by Chips AB in relation to the sale of the Facility, i.e. in a context where Chips AB could reasonably have had no other interest than to obtain an accurate estimate of the market value; (iii) the study was performed by a third party independent of both seller and buyer; and (iv) Colliers International has wide experience in the real estate sector.
Nagu menetluse algatamise otsuses märgitud, on komisjon seisukohal, et seda tuleks käsitada turuhinnana, kuna i) hinnang anti enne müügiläbirääkimiste algust, ii) selle tellis Chips AB rajatise müümiseks, st olukorras, kus tal ei saanud olla muud huvi kui saada täpne hinnang selle turuväärtuse kohta, iii) uuringu tegi nii müüjast kui ka ostjast sõltumatu kolmas osapool ning iv) ettevõtjal Colliers International on kinnisvarasektoris laialdased kogemused.
However, Hammar contests the Commission’s preliminary view that this evaluation was independent, as it was commissioned by the seller.
Hammar vaidlustas komisjoni esialgse seisukoha, et kõnealune hinnang on sõltumatu, kuna selle tellis müüja.
Hammar also considers that the assumptions used by Colliers International were not realistic (inter alia as it assumed only a 10 % vacancy rate), in view of the situation of the Facility at the time of the transaction.
Hammar leiab ka, et Colliers Internationali kasutatud eeldused (muu hulgas eeldus, et välja üürimata jääb ainult 10 % rajatisest) ei olnud realistlikud, pidades silmas rajatise tegelikku olukorda selle müümise ajal.
Swedbank estimated the market value of the Facility at SEK 30 million (EUR 3 million), even though the premises valued were smaller than the total size of the Facility [17].
Swedbanki hinnangul oli rajatise turuväärtus 30 miljonit Rootsi krooni (3 miljonit eurot), kuigi hinnangus ei käsitletud kogu rajatist [17].
The vacancy rate assumption used by Swedbank was 35 %, while all other assumptions were comparable to those used by Colliers International.
Swedbanki hinnangus lähtuti eeldusest, et välja üürimata jääb 35 % rajatisest. Muud eeldused olid samad kui Colliers Internationali hinnangus.
The PwC report provides a series of market value estimates for the Facility depending on the moment at which it was sold.
PwC aruandes esitati rajatise turuväärtuse kohta mitu hinnangut sõltuvalt müügihetkest.
For instance, the report concludes that the value of the Facility at the time of the sale from Chips AB to FABV was approximately SEK 9 million, while it was approximately SEK 5,5 million (EUR 0,55 million) when rented by Hammar from FABV on the same date (13 February 2008).
Näiteks tõdeti aruandes, et rajatise väärtus Chips AB-lt FABV-le müügi ajal oli umbes 9 miljonit Rootsi krooni, kuid ajal, kui Hammar rajatise FABV-lt rendile võttis (st samal kuupäeval, 13. veebruaril 2008) oli selle väärtus 5,5 miljonit Rootsi krooni (umbes 0,55 miljonit eurot).
The PwC report provides a third estimate of the market value of the Facility at the time when Hammar rented it to the local entrepreneurs (1 March 2008) of approximately SEK 21 million (EUR 2,1 million).
PwC aruanne sisaldab ka kolmandat hinnangut rajatise turuväärtuse kohta: ajal, kui Hammar rentis rajatise kohalikele ettevõtjatele (1. märts 2008), oli selle väärtus ligikaudu 21 miljonit Rootsi krooni (2,1 miljonit eurot).
The Commission first notes that the PwC report provides diverging figures for the market value of the Facility over a short period of time.
Komisjon märgib esiteks, et PwC aruandes on rajatise väärtuse kohta esitatud erinevaid näitajaid, mis hõlmavad lühikest ajavahemikku.
Given that the market value of real estate tends to remain relatively constant in the short term, except in the occurrence of exceptional circumstances, the Commission has strong doubts as to some of the valuations provided in the PwC report, in particular in view of the fact that all transactions took place within a very short timeframe.
Arvestades, et kinnisvara turuväärtus võib lühema ajavahemiku jooksul oluliselt muutuda ainult erakorraliste asjaolude tõttu, on komisjonil suuri kahtlusi mõnede PwC aruandes esitatud hinnangute kohta, pidades eriti silmas asjaolu, et tehingud toimusid väga lühikese aja jooksul.
In relation to the first two valuations of the Facility contained in the PwC report (SEK 9 million and SEK 5,5 million, respectively), the Commission comes to the conclusion that, when compared to the contemporaneous estimates of Colliers International and Swedbank, these two valuations appear unrealistic.
Mis puudutab esimest kahte PwC aruandes esitatud hinnangut rajatise väärtuse kohta (9 miljonit ja 5,5 miljonit Rootsi krooni), siis on komisjon seisukohal, et need hinnangud tunduvad ebarealistlikena võrreldes samal ajal koostatud Colliers Internationali ja Swedbanki hinnanguga.
On the one hand, in relation to the estimate of SEK 5,5 million, the Commission notes that PricewaterhouseCoopers (‘PwC’) bases its valuation on the cash flows derived from the rents paid by Hammar to FABV for the rental of the Facility, rents which PwC itself acknowledges to be very low compared to the normal return on a comparable industrial facility.
PricewaterhouseCoopersi (edaspidi „PwC”) pakutud 5,5 miljoni Rootsi kroonise väärtuse kohta märgib komisjon, et hinnang põhineb Hammari poolt FABVle makstud rendist tulenevatel rahavoogudel, kuigi PwC ise tunnistab, et selline renditulu on teiste sarnaste tööstusrajatistega võrreldes väga väike.
This is particularly striking when compared to the rents charged by Hammar to the local entrepreneurs only a few days later, which were approximately seven times higher (see footnotes 7 and 8).
See torkab eriti teravalt silma, võrreldes umbes seitse korda kõrgema rendiga, mida Hammar nõudis kohalikelt ettevõtjatelt vaid mõni päev hiljem (vt joonealused märkused 7 ja 8).
In view of this, the Commission concludes that the rents charged to Hammar were below market price.
Seda silmas pidades järeldab komisjon, et Hammari makstud rent oli turupõhisest rendist väiksem.
The Commission thus considers that the valuation of SEK 5,5 million, which rests on an assumed level of rental income which is below market level, does not reflect the true market value of the Facility.
Seega on komisjon seisukohal, et hinnanguline väärtus 5,5 miljonit Rootsi krooni, mis põhineb turutingimustest odavamast rendist saadaval renditulul, ei kajasta rajatise tegelikku turuväärtust.
On the other hand, the estimate of SEK 9 million rests on an assumed vacancy rate of 100 % in the two first years of ownership, which then falls to 75 % in year 3 and 50 % in year 4 and levels out at 60 % for the remainder of the period covered by the valuation.
Seevastu 9 miljoni Rootsi kroonine hinnanguline väärtus põhineb eeldusel, et kahe esimese aasta jooksul pärast rajatise ostmist on sellest välja rentimata 100 %, kolmandal aastal 75 %, neljandal aastal 50 % ja ülejäänud hinnanguga hõlmatud aja jooksul stabiilselt 60 %.
However, the assumed vacancy rate disregards the fact that, at the time of the sale, it was known that the local entrepreneurs were prepared to rent the Facility, and that consequently the value to assess is that of the Facility with a tenant.
Välja rentimata pinna määra arvutamisel ei ole aga arvesse võetud seda, et müügi ajal oli teada, et kohalikud ettevõtjad olid valmis rajatise rendile võtma. Järelikult oleks pidanud hindama rentnikuga rajatise väärtust.
The third estimate of the PwC report places the market value of the Facility at the time when Hammar sold it to the local entrepreneurs at approximately SEK 21 million, even if the premises covered by that estimate are somewhat smaller than the total size of the Facility (see footnote 17).
PwC aruandes esitatud kolmanda hinnangu kohaselt oli ajal, mil Hammar müüs rajatise kohalikele ettevõtjatele, selle turuväärtus umbes 21 miljonit Rootsi krooni, kuigi hinnang ei käsitlenud kogu rajatist, vaid tervikust pisut väiksemat osa (vt joonealune märkus 17).
That estimate is based on essentially the same methodology as the estimates by Colliers International and Swedbank, and uses as its main assumption the terms of the tenancy agreement between Hammar and the local entrepreneurs, i.e. the terms of the actual lease that applied at the time of the sale.
Hindamismetoodika sarnaneb Colliers Internationali ja Swedbanki hinnangu aluseks olnud meetodile, kusjuures peamiselt lähtuti Hammari ja kohalike ettevõtjate vahelisest rendilepingust, st müügi ajal kehtinud rendilepingu tingimustest.
It must also be noted that the terms of the lease presumably were market conform, in particular since they were agreed between two private market operators arguably having only economically rational motives.
Tuleb ka märkida, et lepingu tingimused eeldatavasti vastasid turutingimustele, kuna nendes olid kokku leppinud kaks turutingimustes tegutsevat eraettevõtjat, kes väidetavalt lähtuvad ainult majanduslikust mõttekusest.
The Commission thus considers that the third estimate of the market value of the Facility contained in the PwC report is plausible.
Seega leiab komisjon, et PwC aruandes esitatud kolmas hinnang rajatise turuväärtuse kohta on usutav.
Therefore, irrespective of which estimate of the Facility’s market value one chooses (the Colliers International one, the Swedbank one, or the third estimate in the PwC report), it is clear that the price of SEK 8 million at which FABV sold the Facility to Hammar was well below market price, and consequently that it granted an advantage to Hammar.
Kokkuvõttes võib järeldada, et olenemata sellest, kas rajatise turuväärtusena käsitatakse Colliers Internationali või Swedbanki hinnangut või PwC kolmandat hinnangut, on selge, et 8 miljonit Rootsi krooni, mille eest FABV müüs rajatise Hammarile, oli tublisti alla turuhinna ning seetõttu on tegemist Hammarile eelise andmisega.
Since all the necessary criteria of Article 107(1) TFEU are met, the Commission concludes that the measure under assessment constitutes State aid. Moreover, since this State aid measure was provided to the beneficiary without prior Commission authorisation, it constitutes unlawful aid.
Seetõttu leiab komisjon, et kuna kõik asjakohased Euroopa Liidu toimimise lepingu artikli 107 lõikes 1 sätestatud kriteeriumid on täidetud, kujutab kõnealune meede endast riigiabi, ning et kuna kõnealust riigiabi anti abisaajale ilma komisjoni eelneva loata, on tegemist ebaseadusliku abiga.
Quantification of the advantage
Eelise suurus
The advantage for the beneficiary will correspond to the difference between the price paid by Hammar, i.e. SEK 8 million, and the market price of the Facility.
Abisaaja kasu suurus võrdub rajatise turuhinna ja Hammari makstud hinna (8 miljonit Rootsi krooni) vahega.
In establishing the market price of the Facility, the Commission will examine the possible alternatives and estimates available, namely: (i) the SEK 17 million effectively paid by FABV to Chips AB on 18 February 2008; (ii) the SEK 40 million effectively paid by the local entrepreneurs to Hammar; (iii) the SEK 27 million estimated by Colliers International before the sale; (iv) the SEK 30 million estimated by Swedbank in June 2008; and (v) the SEK 21 million valuation contained in the PwC report.
Komisjon uurib mitut rajatise turuhinna hinnangut ja selle määratlemise võimalust, nimelt: i) 17 miljonit Rootsi krooni ehk hind, mille FABV maksis Chips AB-le 18. veebruaril 2008; ii) 40 miljonit Rootsi krooni ehk hind, mille kohalikud ettevõtjad maksid Hammarile; iii) 27 miljoni Rootsi krooni vastavalt Colliers Internationali müügieelsele hinnangule; iv) 30 miljoni Rootsi krooni vastavalt Swedbanki 2008. aasta juuni hinnangule ja v) 21 miljonit Rootsi krooni vastavalt PwC aruandele.
The Commission considers that the price of SEK 17 million paid by FABV to Chips AB at the time of its purchase of the Facility does not constitute compelling evidence of the market value.
Komisjoni arvates ei kajasta 17 miljonit Rootsi krooni, mille eest FABV ostis rajatise Chips AB-lt, rajatise turuväärtust veenvalt Komisjon selgitas juba menetluse algatamise otsuses, et Chips AB nõustus turuhinnast madalama hinnaga, kuna soovis vältida ettevõtte maine kahjustamist rajatise sulgemise ja töökohtade kaotamise tagajärjel.
The Commission has already explained in the opening decision that Chips AB accepted a price lower than the estimated market value of the Facility because it wanted to avoid damage to its corporate reputation deriving from the closure of the Facility and the job losses that would have followed, It also wished to avail itself of the opportunity of a quick sale to close the book on its Topp operations.
Chips AB soovis ka kasutada võimalust rajatis kiiresti maha müüa ning Toppi tegevus lõpetada.
A private market operator not having these constraints (which are specific to Chips AB) would have requested a higher price.
Turutingimustes tegutsev eraettevõtja, kellel puudunuksid Chips AB piirangud, oleks nõudnud kõrgemat hinda.
For those reasons, the Commission does not deem it necessary to reply to the argument of Hammar (summarised in recital 27 of the present Decision), which moreover concerns a point which is not part of the formal investigation.
Nimetatud põhjustel ei pea komisjon vajalikuks vastata käesoleva otsuse põhjenduses 27 osutatud Hammari väitele, mis pealegi käsitleb asjaolusid, mida käesolev ametlik uurimine ei hõlma.
On the basis of the information received in the course of the formal investigation procedure, the Commission has also found that the amount of SEK 40 million agreed with the local entrepreneurs does not seem a good proxy for the market price of the Facility, because the entrepreneurs financed this agreed amount partly through a bank loan and partly through a loan from Hammar itself.
Komisjon jõudis ametliku uurimise käigus saadud teabe põhjal järeldusele, et rajatise turuhinda ei kajasta õigesti ka kohalike ettevõtjatega kokku lepitud 40 miljonit Rootsi krooni, kuna ettevõtjad rahastasid seda osaliselt pangalaenu ja osaliselt Hammarilt endalt võetud laenuga.
Indeed, the two options were set within a period of less than three weeks, and such a considerable price difference over a short period of time confirms that this amount was not a market price.
Vähema kui kolme nädala kohta pakuti välja kaks hinda ja suur kõikumine nii lühikese aja jooksul kinnitab, et nimetatud summa ei olnud turuhind.
Regarding the estimates of Colliers International and Swedbank, the Commission sees in principle no reason to doubt that they are independent and produced according to generally accepted standards.
Komisjon ei näe põhimõtteliselt mingit põhjust kahelda selles, et Colliers Internationali ja Swedbanki hinnangud olid sõltumatud ja koostatud üldtunnustatud standardite kohaselt.