natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
ScanCam AS was founded in 1986 by Norsk Film AS and the newspaper VG (Verdens Gang) on the basis of the existing camera department of Norsk Film AS.
ScanCam ASi asutasid 1986. aastal Norsk Film AS ja ajaleht VG (Verdens Gang) Norsk Film ASi senise filmiosakonna baasil.
Later, Norsk Film AS and Schibsted ASA each owned 50 % of the shares in ScanCam AS.
Hiljem omandasid Norsk Film AS ja Schibsted ASA kumbki 50 % ScanCam ASi aktsiatest.
On 31 December 1998, Schibsted ASA sold its stake to Norsk Film AS and ScanCam AS continued as a 100 % owned subsidiary of Norsk FilmStudio AS as from 1999.
31. detsembril 1998 müüs Schibsted ASA oma osakud Norsk Film ASile ning alates 1999. aastast kuulus ScanCam AS 100protsendiliselt Norsk FilmStudio ASile.
Norsk FilmStudio AS, which was founded in 1989, was a wholly-owned subsidiary of Norsk Film AS.
Norsk FilmStudio AS loodi 1989. aastal ja see oli Norsk Film ASi 100-protsendilise osalusega tütarettevõtja.
Until 1989, the studio and technical facilities were an integral division of Norsk Film AS.
Kuni 1989. aastani kuulusid stuudio ja tehnika Norsk Film ASile.
Norsk FilmStudio AS was founded in order to establish a clear-cut distinction between the company’s role as a producer and its role of maintaining the infrastructure for film production (studio and technical facilities).
Norsk FilmStudio AS rajati eesmärgiga eristada selgelt ettevõtjat kui tootjat ning ettevõtjat kui filmitootmise taristu (stuudio ja tehnika) hooldajat.
In 2001, the Norwegian government reformed its film policy and a clearer distinction was made between the State’s areas of responsibility and the responsibility of the private sector.
aastal korraldas Norra valitsus oma filmipoliitika ümber ning riiklike ja erasektori vastutusalade vahele tõmmati selgem piir.
Private production companies should have the responsibility for producing films.
Eratootjate ülesanne peaks olema filme toota.
It was therefore proposed to sell the shares in Norsk Film AS.
Seepärast tehti ettepanek müüa Norsk Film ASi osakud.
The State would maintain its responsibility for the studios as this part of the production process was considered not sustainable on market conditions.
Stuudiod pidid jääma riigi vastutusalasse, sest kõnealust tootmisprotsessiosa ei peetud turutingimustes jätkusuutlikuks.
In 2001, Norsk Film AS was de-merged into two separate companies: a company for film production, named Norsk Film AS and a company for infrastructure, named Filmparken AS.
aastal jagati Norsk Film AS kaheks eraldi ettevõtjaks: filmitootjaks nimega Norsk Film AS ja taristupidajaks nimega Filmparken AS.
The remaining assets of the company stayed in Filmparken AS.
Ettevõtja ülejäänud vara jäi Filmparken ASile.
Norsk FilmStudio AS continued as a wholly-owned subsidiary of Filmparken AS.
Norsk FilmStudio AS jäi endiselt Filmparken ASi 100protsendilise osalusega tütarettevõtjaks.
On 25 June 2001, Norsk FilmStudio AS merged into Filmparken AS.
25. juunil 2001 ühinesid Norsk FilmStudio AS ja Filmparken AS.
The State sold its shares in the production company Norsk Film AS to a private production company called Diopter AS on 4 January 2002.
jaanuaril 2002 müüs riik oma osa tootmisettevõttes Norsk Film AS eraettevõtjale Diopter AS.
In 2002, Filmparken AS was re-named Norsk FilmStudio AS again.
aastal nimetati Filmparken AS uuesti ümber Norsk FilmStudio ASiks.
In 2004, ScanCam AS merged into Norsk FilmStudio AS.
aastal ühines ScanCam AS Norsk FilmStudio ASiga.
In 2009, Norsk FilmStudio AS and The Chimney Pot AS merged to become Storyline Studios AS.
aastal ühinesid Norsk FilmStudio AS ja The Chimney Pot AS ning moodustasid Storyline Studios ASi.
After the merger Filmparken AS owns 60 % of the business with 40 % left to the shareholders of the prior Chimney Pot AS.
Pärast ühinemist omab Filmparken AS 60 % ettevõtte aktsiatest ja 40 % jäi endise The Chimney Pot ASi aktsionäridele.
Storyline Studios AS is a full spectre supplier of equipment and services to the film industry, providing film studios, grip and light, camera, post production, costumes, financing, office facilities, line production and film catalogues.
Storyline Studios AS varustab filmitööstust paljude eri vahendite ja teenustega, nagu filmistuudiote, kinnitus- ja valgustustehnika, kaamerate, montaaži, kostüümide, rahastamise, büroovahendite, liinitootmise ja filmikataloogidega.
Description of the measures investigated
Uuritud meetmete kirjeldus
The Authority investigated two different measures: the payment of the grant of NOK 36 million (see Section 3.1) and the preferential tax treatment some companies belonging to the Norsk Film group benefited from (see section 3.2).
Järelevalveamet uuris kaht eri meedet: 36 miljoni Norra krooni suuruse toetuse maksmist (vt punkt 3.1) ning mõningate kontserni Norsk Film kuuluvate ettevõtjate soodsamat maksualast kohtlemist (vt punkt 3.2).
Payment of the grant of NOK 36 million
36 miljoni Norra krooni suuruse toetuse maksmine
The grants were paid by the Ministry of Culture and Church Affairs.
Toetusi eraldas kultuuri- ja kirikuasjade ministeerium.
The Authority, in its Decision No 491/09/COL, has taken the view that the yearly payments made by the Norwegian State since the 1970s to various entities belonging to the Norsk Film group for the production of feature films and to maintain an infrastructure necessary for the production of films were based on an existing system of aid.
Oma otsuses nr 491/09/COL on järelevalveamet võtnud seisukoha, et iga-aastased toetused, mida Norra riik maksis alates 1970. aastatest kontserni Norsk Film kuuluvatele eri üksustele mängufilmide tootmiseks ja filmitootmiseks vajaliku taristu hooldamiseks, põhinesid olemasoleval abikaval.
The Norwegian authorities have indicated that in 1997, the Norwegian Parliament decided to grant NOK 36 million to Norsk Film AS for the upgrading, modernisation and development of the production facilities called “Filmparken”.
Norra ametiasutused on märkinud, et 1997. aastal otsustas Norra parlament eraldada 36 miljoni Norra krooni suuruse toetuse Norsk Film ASile tootmisrajatise nimega „Filmparken” ajakohastamiseks, uuendamiseks ja arendamiseks.
The grant was allocated over the national budget’s section for grants to national cultural buildings.
Toetust anti riigieelarve jaotisest, mis oli ette nähtud riikliku kaitse all olevatele hoonetele.
The Authority, in Decision No 491/09/COL, considered that as the payment of the grant of NOK 36 million was based on a different budget allocation and the specific amount was singled out for a special aim (renovation of the jar site), it could amount to new aid.
Oma otsuses nr 491/09/COL leidis järelevalveamet, et kuna 36 miljoni Norra krooni suurune makse tehti eri eelarveeraldisena ning konkreetsel toetusel oli erieesmärk (võttestuudio remont), võiks seda pidada uueks abikavaks.
The Authority had doubts as to whether this contribution formed part of the existing system of aid or whether it constituted a new aid measure.
Järelevalveamet väljendas kahtlust, kas makse oli olemasoleva abikava osa või saab seda pidada uueks abimeetmeks.
Preferential tax treatment
Soodsam maksustamine
Norsk Film AS and Norsk FilmStudio AS benefited from a tax exemption as from 1995.
Norsk Film AS ja Norsk FilmStudio AS said 1995. aastal maksuvabastuse.
The exemption was based on Section 26, first paragraph, litra k, of the former Tax Act of 18 August 1911 No 8, replaced by the Tax Act of 26 March 1999 No 14 [4].According to Section 2-32 of the Norwegian Tax Act, presently setting out the rules regarding this preferential tax regime, non-profit organisations, institutions and companies are exempt from corporate tax to the extent that they operate on a non-profit basis.
Vabastus põhines endise, 18. augustil 1911 vastu võetud maksuseaduse nr 8 (mis asendati 26. märtsil 1999. aastal maksuseadusega nr 14) paragrahvi 26 esimese lõigu punktil k [4].Kõnealuse soodsama maksualase kohtlemise eeskirju sätestava praegu kehtiva Norra maksuseaduse paragrahvi 2-32 järgi on mittetulundusühendused, asutused ja ettevõtjad vabastatud ettevõtte tulumaksust niivõrd, kuivõrd nad tegutsevad mittetulunduslikel alustel.
Whether an institution or a company is considered as non-profit according to Section 2-32 is determined on the basis of objective criteria, with the purpose of the company being the decisive factor.
Kas asutust või ettevõtja tegevust peetakse mittetulunduslikuks paragrahvi 2-32 kohaselt, määratakse kindlaks objektiivsete kriteeriumide alusel, kusjuures otsustav tegur on ettevõtja eesmärk.
Thus, a charitable purpose indicates the presence of a non-profit body.
Heategevuslik eesmärk viitab seega mittetulundusühenduse olemasolule.
In order to determine the purpose of the company, the tax authorities take into account inter alia its statutes including its statutory purpose and the activity actually carried out.
Et ettevõtja eesmärki kindlaks teha, võtab maksuhaldur muu hulgas arvesse tema põhikirja, sealhulgas tema põhikirja kohast eesmärki ja tegelikku tegevust.
Whether the body is engaged in activities that are exposed to competition is also taken into consideration.
Samuti võetakse arvesse, kas ühenduse tegevus on avatud konkurentsile.
If the undertaking carries out economic or commercial activities and competes with taxable profit driven companies, this indicates the existence of a taxable status.
Kui ettevõtja tegevus on majanduslik või äriline ning ta konkureerib maksukohustuslike kasumit taotlevate ettevõtjatega, viitab see sellele, et ta on maksukohustuslane.
Another element taken into account is the nature of the funding of the undertaking.
Veel üks arvestatav tegur on ettevõtja rahastamise olemus.
If the company is funded by private gifts or other contributions, this indicates that the company has a non-profit purpose.
Kui ettevõtjat rahastatakse eraannetustest või muudest eraldistest, viitab see ettevõtja mittetulunduslikule eesmärgile.
An organisation considered non-profit is exempt from corporate tax for profit resulting from the non-profit purpose of the company.
Organisatsioon, mida peetakse mittetulunduslikuks, on vabastatud ettevõtte tulumaksust ettevõtja mittetulunduslikust eesmärgist tuleneva kasumi osas.
Income derived from commercial activities is – under certain conditions – subject to corporate tax [5].Whether Section 2-32 is applicable to a company or organisation is determined by the tax authorities as part of the normal annual assessment process.
Äritegevusest saadud tulult tuleb teatavatel tingimustel maksta ettevõtte tulumaksu [5].Maksuhaldur teeb tavapärase iga-aastase hindamise käigus kindlaks, kas ettevõtja või organisatsiooni suhtes saab kohaldada paragrahvi 2-32.
It is on the basis of the information provided by the tax payer in the tax return and other information available that the local tax authorities determine which tax regime is applicable.
Kohalik maksuhaldur määrab, maksustamiskorra kohaldamise laadi maksumaksja maksudeklaratsioonis esitatud teabe ja muu kättesaadava teabe alusel.
Norsk Film AS, Norsk FilmStudio AS and ScanCam AS were granted a tax exemption based on the fact that the purpose of the companies was non-profit.
Norsk Film ASile, Norsk FilmStudio ASile ja ScanCam ASile anti maksuvabastus selle alusel, et ettevõtjate eesmärk oli mittetulunduslik.
Until 1995, Norsk Film AS and Norsk FilmStudio AS did not apply for the special regime.
Kuni 1995. aastani ei taotlenud Norsk Film AS ja Norsk FilmStudio AS erikorra rakendamist.
Following their applications they benefited from such a regime from 1995 until 2001.
Pärast taotluste esitamist kasutasid nad seda korda 1995.–2001. aastal.
As from 2002, the companies were no longer funded by government subsidies and they carried out normal business activities.
Alates 2002. aastast ei rahastatud ettevõtjaid enam riiklikest subsiidiumidest ning nad tegelesid tavalise äritegevusega.
They were therefore considered as normal profit-making companies and consequently subject to standard corporate tax.
Seepärast peeti neid tavalisteks kasumit taotlevateks ettevõtjateks ja sellest tulenevalt kehtis nende suhtes ettevõtte tulumaksu tavamäär.
Until 1998, Norsk Film AS and Schibsted ASA each owned 50% of the shares in ScanCam AS.
Kuni 1998. aastani omasid Norsk Film AS ja Schibsted ASA kumbki 50 % ScanCam ASi aktsiatest.
ScanCam AS was therefore not considered an integrated part of Norsk Film AS’ business.
Seepärast ei peetud ScanCam ASi Norsk Film ASi ettevõtluse integreeritud osaks.
From December 1998, ScanCam AS was 100 % owned first by Norsk Film AS and then, from 1999, by Norsk FilmStudio AS (the wholly-owned subsidiary of Norsk Film AS). After this change, the tax authorities considered that ScanCam AS was an integrated part of Norsk Film AS’ activity and could therefore benefit from the same tax regime for the years 1998–2000.
Alates 1998. aasta detsembrist kuulus ScanCam AS 100protsendiliselt Norsk Film ASile ning seejärel, alates 1999. aastast, Norsk FilmStudio ASile (Norsk Film ASi 100protsendilise osalusega tütarettevõtjale).
ScanCam AS generated a profit in the years 1998, 1999, 2000 and 2001 [6].In their evaluation, the tax authorities considered that the companies could benefit from the non-profit organisation status on the basis of the following elements: the statutes of Norsk Film AS which provided that its purpose was non-profit, the fact that 97,7 % of the shares were held by the State and local municipalities and the fact that the company was funded essentially through state subsidies.
Pärast kõnealust muudatust pidas maksuhaldur ScanCam ASi Norsk Film ASi tegevuse integreeritud osaks ning seetõttu sai see 1998.–2000. aastal kasutada ühesugust maksustamiskorda. 1998., 1999., 2000. ja 2001. aastal sai ScanCam AS kasumit [6].Oma hinnangus leidis maksuhaldur, et ettevõtjad said oma mittetulundusühenduse staatusest kasu, tuues põhjuseks järgmised asjaolud: Norsk Film ASi põhikirjas oli sätestatud tema mittetulunduslik eesmärk; 97,7 % aktsiatest kuulus riigile ja kohalikele omavalitsustele; ettevõtjat rahastati peamiselt riiklike subsiidiumide kaudu.
The tax authorities furthermore indicated that the tax exemption was given under the proviso that a possible profit should be used in full to achieve the purpose of the company within the framework of being a non-profit undertaking.
Samuti märkis maksuhaldur, et maksuvabastus anti reservatsiooniga, et võimalikku tulu tuleks kasutada täielikult ettevõtja mittetulundusliku eesmärgi täitmisel.
The subsidiary Norsk FilmStudio AS was regarded as an integrated part of Norsk Film AS’ activity and covered by the same tax exemption.
Tütarettevõtjat Norsk FilmStudio AS peeti Norsk Film ASi tegevuse integreeritud osaks ja tema suhtes kohaldati sama maksuvabastust.
The Norwegian authorities have indicated that Norsk FilmStudio AS did not generate a profit in the years 1995–2001 and that consequently, the application of the favourable tax regime was without effect.
Norra ametiasutused on märkinud, et Norsk FilmStudio AS ei saanud 1995.–2001. aastal tulu ning seega ei olnud soodsa maksustamiskorra kohaldamisel mingit mõju.
The companies are now all subject to standard corporate tax.
Praegu peavad ettevõtjad tasuma ettevõtte tulumaksu tavamäära.
The Authority, in Decision No 491/09/COL, considered that it was doubtful whether the application of the exemption from corporate tax based on the logic of exemption for non-profit organisations may justify the tax exemption in the case of the companies belonging to the Norsk Film group.
Järelevalveamet leidis oma otsuses nr 491/09/COL, et on küsitav, kas ettevõtte tulumaksuvabastuse kohaldamine mittetulundusühenduste maksuvabastuse loogika alusel võib põhjendada maksuvabastust kontserni Norsk Film kuuluvate ettevõtjate puhul.
The aid in the form of an exemption from corporate tax is operating aid.
Abi ettevõtte tulumaksust vabastamise kujul on tegevusabi.
Such aid is only allowed under special circumstances, and, in particular, in situations where the criteria set out in the Authority’s Guidelines are met (e.g. for certain types of environmental or regional aid).
Selline abi on lubatud üksnes teatavatel juhtudel ning eelkõige olukordades, kus on täidetud järelevalveameti suunistes sätestatud kriteeriumid (nt teatavat tüüpi keskkonna- või regionaalabi puhul).
The Authority therefore doubted that the special tax rules – as applied to some of the companies belonging to the Norsk Film group – could be justified under the state aid provisions of the EEA Agreement.
Seepärast pidas järelevalveamet küsitavaks, kas maksustamise erieeskirjad, nagu neid kohaldati mõnele kontserni Norsk Film kuuluvale ettevõtjale, olid põhjendatud EMP lepingu riigiabi käsitlevate sätete tähenduses.
The payment of the grant does not constitute state aid
Toetuse maksmine ei ole riigiabi
The Norwegian authorities argue that the payment of the NOK 36 million does not constitute state aid.
Norra ametiasutused väidavad, et 36 miljoni Norra krooni maksmist ei saa pidada riigiabiks.
Adopting an effects based approach, the Norwegian authorities claim that the grant under review did not actually confer any economic advantage upon the recipient.
Võtnud aluseks tulemuspõhise lähenemisviisi, väidavad Norra ametiasutused, et kontrollitav toetus ei andnud saajale mingit majanduslikku eelist.
The Norwegian authorities consider that none of the companies gained any economic advantage as a result of the grant for upgrading and modernisation of Filmparken.
Norra ametiasutused leiavad, et ükski neist ettevõtjatest ei saanud Filmparkeni ajakohastamise ja uuendamise toetuse tulemusel mingit majanduslikku eelist.
Norsk FilmStudio AS was responsible for renting out the facilities to all production companies in Norway.
Norsk FilmStudio ASi ülesanne oli anda kõikidele Norra tootmisettevõtjatele rendile rajatisi.
There was a clear legal separation within the Norsk Film group of the activities of production of film and rental of production facilities.
Kontserni Norsk Film tegevuses oli selge õiguslik vahe filmitootmisel ja tootmisrajatiste rentimisel.
Access to the production facilities was open and given to all Norwegian production companies (including Norsk Film AS) on equal terms and conditions.
Juurdepääs tootmisrajatistele oli võrdsetel tingimustel avatud ja seda võimaldati kõikidele Norra tootmisettevõtjatele, sealhulgas Norsk Film ASile.
The rental activities were not profitable and generated deficits for Norsk FilmStudio AS.
Renditegevus ei olnud tulus ja tekitas Norsk FilmStudio ASile eelarvepuudujäägi.
The Norwegian authorities argue that it cannot be said that the measure gave the Norsk Film group an economic advantage as this was clearly not the effect of the grant.
Norra ametiasutused väidavad, et ei saa öelda, et meede oleks andnud kontsernile Norsk Film majandusliku eelise, sest toetusel ei olnud kindlasti sellist mõju.
The intent and the effect of the measure were rather to provide Norwegian film producers with access to production facilities.
Meetme eesmärk ja mõju olid pigem pakkuda Norra filmitootjatele juurdepääsu tootmisrajatistele.
They stress that it was only due to a market failure that Norsk FilmStudio AS acted as the sole provider of rental studio facilities where films of a certain length and quality could be produced.
Nad rõhutavad, et üksnes turutõrke tõttu oli Norsk FilmStudio AS ainus, kes andis rendile stuudio, kus sai toota teatava pikkuse ja kvaliteediga filme.
The company did so to the benefit of all producers and did not receive an economic advantage.
Ettevõtja tegeles sellega tootjate heaks ega saanud majanduslikku kasu.
The measure would in any event constitute existing aid
Meedet saab igal juhul pidada olemasolevaks abiks
The Norwegian authorities argue that even if the grant of NOK 36 million amounted to state aid, it would, in any event, constitute existing aid.
Norra ametiasutused väidavad, et isegi kui 36 miljoni Norra krooni suurune toetus oli riigiabi, võib seda igal juhul pidada olemasolevaks abiks.
Indeed, the Norwegian authorities consider that the payment of the NOK 36 million grant formed part of the existing system of aid in the form of the payment of the yearly grants.
Norra ametiasutused leiavad, et 36 miljoni Norra krooni suuruse toetuse maksmine moodustas osa olemasolevast abikavast iga-aastaste toetuste maksmise kujul.
The Norwegian authorities state that the fact that the grant was paid out from a different budget than that used for the yearly grants is not a sufficient indication that the grant itself constituted a severable and new measure.
Norra ametiasutused kinnitavad, et kuigi toetus maksti välja erinevast eelarvest kui iga-aastasteks toetusteks kasutatud eelarve, ei saa toetust ennast pidada eraldiseisvaks uueks meetmeks.
They explain that the fact that the grant in 1998–1999 was allocated over another budget post was “merely coincidental and a question of technicalities and the payment of the NOK 36 million might as well have been allocated over the budget section for film funding and spread out over a period of ten years and thus been “melted into” the yearly payments to Norsk Film AS comprising both operating and investment aid. The fact that the grant 1998-1999 was allocated over another budget post was a result of a new way of organising the [national] budget section for contributions to the construction of national buildings”.
Nad selgitavad, et asjaolu, et 1998.–1999. aastal eraldati toetust teise eelarvepunkti alusel, oli „täielik kokkusattumus ja tehniline küsimus ning 36 miljoni Norra krooni suurust makset oleks saanud eraldada ka filmide rahastamiseks ettenähtud eelarveosast ja jagada kümne aasta peale ning sel viisil „sulatada ühte” Norsk Film ASi iga-aastaste maksetega, mis koosnesid nii tegevus- kui ka investeeringuabist. Asjaolu, et 1998.–1999. aastal eraldati toetust muu eelarvepunkti alusel, tulenes riiklike hoonete ehitamiseks ettenähtud [riigi]eelarveosa uuest korraldusest”.
The Norwegian authorities furthermore argue that what is important is that the payment was part of a systematic and continuous chain of payments to the same recipient and that the nature of the aid is unchanged.
Samuti rõhutavad Norra ametiasutused, et makse oli osa süstemaatilistest ja pidevatest maksetest ühele ja samale saajale ning et abi eesmärki ei ole muudetud.
The scheme is said to have always consisted of an investment part and an operating part.
Nad väidavad, et kava on alati koosnenud investeeringu- ja tegevustoetusest.
The upgrading and modernising process had been ongoing for some time and the costs involved had, until 1998 – 1999, been estimated to NOK 13 million.
Ajakohastamine ja uuendamine oli juba mõnda aega toimunud ning selle maksumus enne 1998.–1999. aastat oli hinnanguliselt 13 miljonit Norra krooni.
This amount included contributions from the Norwegian State through the existing support scheme which was in place since the 1970s.
Kõnealune summa hõlmas Norra riigi makseid, mida tehti olemasoleva toetuskava alusel, mis kehtis alates 1970. aastatest.
In 1997, however, it became clear that NOK 13 million was not sufficient to complete the works and therefore it was decided to allocate an additional NOK 36 million to complete the upgrading.
Kuid 1997. aastal selgus, et 13 miljonist Norra kroonist ei piisa tööde lõpetamiseks, ning seepärast otsustati ajakohastamise lõpetamiseks eraldada täiendavad 36 miljonit Norra krooni.
The Norwegian authorities provided the Authority with data supporting that also in the past amounts had been allocated and earmarked for the upgrading and modernisation of infrastructures necessary for maintaining conditions for film production.
Norra ametiasutused esitasid järelevalveametile andmed selle kohta, et filmitootmise tingimuste säilitamiseks vajaliku taristu ajakohastamise ja uuendamise jaoks on summasid eraldatud ka varem.
Finally, the Norwegian authorities argue that the fact that the amount of the grant was much higher than the yearly payments had been until then was no indication that it constituted new aid.
Lõpuks väitsid Norra ametiasutused, et kuigi toetuse summa oli palju suurem kui senised iga-aastased maksed, ei tähenda see, et seda saaks pidada uueks abiks.