natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Purely in the alternative, the Commission would observe that, even if one were to accept Belgium's argument that part of the initial capital of Ducroire/Delcredere was allocated to non-marketable risks and therefore could not come within the scope of Article 107(1) of the TFEU, this argument would apply to the amount of EUR 36,36 million only if Belgium managed to demonstrate that the capital allocated to non-marketable risks was higher than EUR [70-110] million.
Eelmises põhjenduses mainitud eeldatava tulususe hinnang põhineb erinevalt ONDD tehtud tootluse arvestustest kogu hinnangulise turukõlblike riskidega seotud kapitali summal, mis hõlmab ka kapitali sissemaksmata osa.
(To calculate the EUR 36,6 million, an amount of EUR [70-110] million supporting the activity relating to non-marketable risks has already been deducted from the EUR 150 million.)
Turutingimustes tegutsev erainvestor nõuaks kõnealuse investeeringuga seotud riskide hüvitamist, kuivõrd ettevõtja maksejõuetuks muutumisel võib ta oma investeeringu osaliselt või täielikult kaotada.
It is clear that such an amount was never allocated to non-marketable risks in 2004, as internal documents indicate that EUR 100 million of capital was sufficient to cover all short-term risks (both non-marketable and marketable) until 2007.
Seetõttu ei ole Belgia ametiasutuste arvutustega võimalik nõustuda.
Application of the principle of a private investor in a market economy
Samas tuleb nõustuda sellega, et kõnealune investor võib oma investeeringule vastava sissemaksmata kapitali osa paigutada, seni kuni seda kapitali ei ole sisse nõutud, lühema või keskpika tähtajaga likviidsetesse riskivabadesse finantsinstrumentidesse ja saada seeläbi kõnealusele paigutusele vastavat tootlust.
According to settled case law, in order to establish that a measure grants an economic advantage, it is necessary to consider whether, in similar circumstances, a market economy investor of a size comparable to that of the undertaking concerned would have made a capital contribution of the same amount [68], particularly in the light of the available information and foreseeable developments at the time of the investment.
Sellest tuleneb, et selline investor eeldab saada sissemaksmata kapitali investeerimisel hüvitist üksnes selle ettevõtja, millesse ta investeerib, riskipreemia ulatuses (st see hüvitis võrdub samalaadsesse ettevõtjasse investeeritud kapitali eeldatava tootluse ja likviidse lühi- või keskpika tähtajaga riskivaba rahapaigutuse tootluse määra vahega) [82].
In the present case, an analysis must be carried out as to whether the supplementary capital of EUR 36,6 million granted in 2004 would have been sufficiently profitable to convince a private market economy investor.
Seega tuleb osaliselt sissemakstud kapitali eeldatava tootluse hindamisel võtta arvesse kogu märgitud kapitali, kuid seejuures tuleb muuta sissemaksmata kapitali eeldatava tootluse määra.
However, the profitability of this supplementary capital cannot be examined separately from the capital as a whole as the supplementary capital results from an artificial division of the capital of EUR 150 million subscribed in 2004.
Komisjon viis läbi erinevate stsenaariumide simulatsioonid, sealhulgas ka kõige suurema eeldatava tootlusega stsenaariumi simulatsiooni, mille korral nõustutakse asjaoluga, et turukõlblike riskidega seotud tegevuse jaoks eraldatud [45–65] miljoni euro suurusest kapitalist oli 2004. aastal sisse makstud üksnes [10–25] miljonit eurot (st kapital, mida juba ettevõtjas ONDD kasutati turukõlblike riskidega seotud tegevuseks) ning ülejäänud 36,6 miljonit eurot käsitleti sissemaksmata kapitalina, mille puhul oli nõutav üksnes riskipreemia.
It is impossible to identify any precise flow of income coming from this EUR 36,6 million.
Saadud summa jagati turukõlblike riskidega seotud tegevuse jaoks kasutatava kapitali keskmise summaga.
The Commission therefore considers that, in order to apply the private investor test correctly, the expected profitability of the entire capital of EUR 150 million must be verified to see whether it was sufficient.
Hinnangulise tootluse arvestuses (mis on esitatud põhjenduses 168) on vastupidiselt Belgia ettepanekule võetud arvesse tasandamiseraldisi.
If not, the conclusion will have to be drawn that the EUR 36,6 million constitutes an advantage.
Et kõnealuste Belgia järelevalveasutuste nõutavate eraldiste eesmärk on majandustulemuste ajaline ühtlustamine ning ettevõtja tulevasest tegevusest tingitud kahjumi katmine, tuleb pidada asjakohaseks võtta neid tootluse arvutamisel arvesse.
Purely in the alternative, another possibility would be to apply a pro rata method to the overall profit generated, which would produce the same result.
Komisjoni lähenemisviis vastab raamatupidamislikule põhimõttele, mille kohaselt neid eraldisi käsitletakse kasumit vähendava kuluna.
Nor does the Commission consider that the profitability of the additional capital of EUR [75-100] million alone should be examined, excluding the EUR [45-75] million allocated to the short-term risk activity before its transfer to Ducroire/Delcredere.
Isegi kui seda kasumi prognoosimisel kuluna arvesse ei võeta, jääb eeldatav tootlus väiksemaks Belgia ametiasutuste endi arvestatud kapitali maksumuse tasemest (käesolevas otsuses ei võta komisjon seisukohta Belgia ametiasutuste tehtud kapitalikulude prognoosi kehtivuse kohta, kuivõrd see arv ei ole käesolevas otsuses esitatud põhjenduse aluseks).
The ONDD could in fact have decided to terminate its short-term risk activity and recover the amount of capital allocated to this activity at the time, namely EUR [45-75] million [69].
Seega ilmneb, et isegi kui võtta aluseks Belgia ametiasutuste esitatud väited (mida komisjon peab ekslikeks), ei ole turukõlblike riskidega seotud tegevuse tootlus piisav selleks, et veenda turutingimustes tegutsevat eraettevõtjat kõnealust investeeringut tegema.
This EUR [45-75] million cannot, therefore, be regarded as a sunk cost.
Lisaks, mis puudutab komisjoni 2007. aasta detsembri teabenõudele Belgia ametiasutustelt saadud vastust, siis märgib komisjon seoses vastuses kaitstava meetodiga, mis on mõeldud tootluse hindamiseks, st jutt on ROR suhtarvust, et kõnealust suhtarvu ei kasutatud ONDD ex ante finantsprognooside (äriplaani) puhul.
In the recitals that follow, the Commission will demonstrate that the expected profitability of the EUR 150 million was insufficient to convince a private investor to make such an investment.
Liiatigi näitab kõnealune suhtarv ettevõtja käibest tulenevat tehnilist tulemit, ei võta arvesse investeeritud kapitali suurust ja ei näita tootluse seost kõnealuse kapitaliga.
In the alternative, it will show that, even if one considers that the marketable risk activity benefited virtually from a capital of EUR [45-65] million (EUR 36,6 million plus EUR [10-25] million) and from the expected profits from this specific activity, the expected profitability of this activity was also insufficient.
Samuti ei võta see arvesse puhtalt finantstegevuse tulemust, mis on samas raamatupidamisliku kasumi osa ja jagatakse aktsionäridele.
The criterion of a private investor in a market economy must be applied ex ante.
Omavahenditesse investeerija, näiteks aktsionär, ei võtaks kavandatava investeeringu tootluse hindamisel arvesse üksnes seda määra, mis ei näita omavahendite ja investeeritud summade tootlust.
The appropriate time for assessing whether a private investor would have made such a contribution is the time when the capital contribution was made.
Seega on kõnealuse 36,6 miljoni euro näol tegemist ettevõtja ONDD poolt ettevõtjale SA Ducroire kapitali kujul antava eelisega, mida kõnealune ettevõtja ei oleks saanud samadel tingimustel turul tegutsedes.
When assessing the private investor criterion, developments subsequent to the capital contribution must not be taken into account.
Abi omistatavus riigile ja riigi vahendid
Moreover, compliance with the principle of a private investor in a market economy can be demonstrated by an ex ante business plan on the basis of which the decision to invest was made [70].
Kureeriva ministri ettepanekul ametissenimetatud haldusnõukogu liikmed tegutsevad ministri volinikena ja neil on õigus haldusnõukogu istungitel kasutada vetoõigust otsuste suhtes, mida nad leiavad olevat riigi huvidega vastuolus.
According to recent case law [71], a Member State can only invoke objective and verifiable elements taken into account prior to or at the same time as the decision to make an investment.
Sellisel juhul teeb otsuse suhtes vetoõigust kasutanud ministri volinik viivitamatult ettekande teda volitanud ministrile.
Thus elements may be required that show that this decision is based on comparable economic assessments to those that a rational private investor in a comparable situation would have made before such an investment in order to determine its future profitability.
Ja lõpuks on avalik-õiguslikul ettevõtjal ONDD Belgia riigi tagatis ja ta võib teha tehinguid Belgia riigi nimel.
Since no private investors took part in the measure at issue and Ducroire/Delcredere is not listed on the stock exchange, the parameter whose validity must be assessed is the expected profitability of the investment as could be reckoned on from the available information and the developments that were foreseeable at the time (as featured, in principle, in the business plan drawn up by the ONDD in 2004).
Belgia ametiasutused ei ole vaidlustanud Belgia riigi seotust kapitali eraldamist hõlmava meetmega.
According to the case law of the Court of Justice [72] and the Commission's decision-making practice [73], the fact that a capital contribution is allegedly necessary for the undertaking to continue its operations or to ensure the adequate capitalisation of the business, in accordance with prudential rules or an estimation of the risks involved, is not sufficient grounds on which to consider that the market economy investor principle has been satisfied.
Belgia riigiga seotud avalik-õigusliku asutuse ONDD teostatud kapitali eraldamine ettevõtjale SA Ducroire toimus seega riigi ressurssidest Euroopa Liidu toimimise lepingu artikli 107 tähenduses.
A private investor operating under normal market conditions would make such a capital contribution only if the expected profitability was sufficient, at the time of the contribution, based on the available information and the developments that were foreseeable at that particular time [74].
Valikulisus
The Commission would therefore point out that Belgium's arguments to justify its assertion that a capital of EUR 150 million was ‘necessary’ for economic reasons and/or because of prudential rules cannot be relied on to demonstrate that this investment was sufficiently profitable for a market investor.
2004. aastal toimunud kapitali eraldamine on valikuline, kuivõrd see puudutas otseselt üksnes ettevõtjat SA Ducroire.
The Belgian authorities based their analysis of profitability on the business plan of 28 September 2004.
Konkurentsi kahjustamine
Ducroire/Delcredere was in fact incorporated on 23 September 2004.
Et ONDD eraldas kõnealuse kapitali, eeldamata selle piisavat tootlust, sai ettevõtja SA Ducroire konkurentsieelise võrreldes eraõiguslike krediidikindlustuse andjatega, mille aktsionärid eeldasid oma investeeringult tootlust, mis oleks tasemel, mida nad võisid eeldada samaväärsetelt teistelt investeeringutelt.
It can therefore be considered that, until shortly before that date, the ONDD could have gone back on its investment decision by not transferring the risks in question and by liquidating the newly created legal entity.
See tähendab, et ilma ONDD vahendusel riigilt saadud kapitalita ei oleks ettevõtja SA Ducroire saanud oma tegevust turul sellises ulatuses laiendada, nagu ta seda tegi.
It is therefore acceptable to take into account the ONDD's business plan of 28 September 2004 as requested by the Belgian authorities.
Seejuures on ekspordikrediidikindlustust käsitleva teatise punktis 3.2 täpsustatud, et teatud ekspordikrediidikindlustuse andjad, kes saavad riigilt kapitali viisil, mis ei vasta turutingimustes tegutseva erainvestori kriteeriumile, moonutavad konkurentsi.
It emerges from the notes and minutes of 2004 that the ONDD's decision to endow Ducroire/Delcredere with a capital of EUR 150 million to Ducroire was essentially due to the ONDD's wish to endow its subsidiary with ‘sufficient’ initial capital to enable it to develop its business and […] — ‘a paid-up capital of EUR 100 million is sufficient to carry on the short-term exporters' global policies business until 2007 but this should be reviewed after that date’ [75], however it was not actually and precisely demonstrated that the expected future profitability was satisfactory from a private investor's point of view.
Euroopa Kohtu kohtupraktika kohaselt on ettevõtja konkurentsiolukorra parandamine riigiabi andmisega üldjuhul tõendiks selle kohta, et on kahjustatud konkurentsi seoses teiste ettevõtjatega, kes ei ole sarnast abi saanud [86].
In terms of expected profitability analysis, a positive result anticipated for all activities in the first three years seems to have been enough to convince the ONDD to make the investment.
Riigi poolne ettevõtjale ONDD turukõlblike riskide katmiseks vajaliku kapitali eraldamise teel antud abi moonutab või võib moonutada konkurentsi.
According to the projections in scenario B of the business plan of 28 September 2004, the ONDD was counting on an ROC for all activities of 1,3 % to 1,9 % for 2005, 2006 and 2007 in line with the ‘6 % growth process’ scenario in the business plan (the ROC before the equalisation provision was 2,8-4,3 %) (see Table 4).
Liikmesriikidevahelise kaubanduse kahjustamine
It must be explained that this profitability is based on a capital of EUR 100 million and does not take account of the EUR 50 million not paid up, which makes the profitability result more favourable than it is in reality.
Ettevõtja SA Ducroire on konkurentsiolukorras teiste Euroopa Liidu ettevõtjatega krediidikindlustuse turul.
In the light of the above, it seems that the expected profitability of the future Ducroire/Delcredere was insufficient to convince a private investor in a market economy to make such an investment.
Lisaks sellele tegutsevad ONDD ja ettevõtja SA Ducroire ka teistes liikmesriikides, eeskätt tänu Tšehhi riikliku ekspordikrediidikindlustuse ameti äriharu KUP omandamisele.
The average rate for long-term Belgian government bonds in 2004 was 4,15 % [76].
Väljakujunenud kohtupraktika kohaselt on liikmesriikidevahelise kaubanduse kahjustamisega tegemist juhul, kui abi saav ettevõtja (või abi saavad ettevõtjad) tegutsevad konkurentsile avatud valdkonnas, mis on liikmesriikidevahelise kaubanduse objekt [87].
Even taking the equalisation provision into account, the expected profitability rate reached only the risk-free rate.
Asjaolu, et käesoleva menetluse aluseks oli Belgiast erineva liikmesriigi kaebus kaubanduse kahjustamise kohta ettevõtja SA Ducroire tegevuse tõttu kolmandas liikmesriigis (Tšehhi Vabariigis), vaid kinnitab seda, et ettevõtja SA Ducroire tegutseb liikmesriikidevahelist kaubandust hõlmavas valdkonnas.
A private investor in a market economy would not accept such a low profitability during the first few years unless he could reasonably count on being compensated later by profits significantly higher than the average for the industry, so that the total return on investment (after applying an appropriate discount rate) would be sufficient [77].
Seega kahjustab meede 3 tuntavalt liikmesriikidevahelist kaubandust.
There was no serious study in 2004 that could lead one to consider that this low initial profitability would be compensated by an increased profitability in later years.
VÕIMALIKU ABI EBASEADUSLIKKUS
The Commission would also point out that the financial projections available at the time showed that performance remained at the same level between 2005 and 2007, or at least that there was only sluggish growth (see Table 4), therefore there was nothing to indicate that results would improve rapidly in the years beyond 2007.
Eelnevast nähtub, et meetme näol 3 on tegemist abiga.
In this connection, it must be noted that the conversion of Ducroire/Delcredere into a subsidiary cannot be regarded as being the same thing as a start-up since it was envisaged at the time that it would continue with the activities previously carried on by the parent company, and the assets and liabilities were simply transferred from the ONDD to Ducroire/Delcredere for this purpose.
Komisjoni hinnangul on tegemist uue abiga, millest ei ole komisjonile teatatud, seega on tegemist ebaseadusliku abiga.
This conclusion is also based on the way in which financial projections were produced at the time.
ONDD märkis kõnealuse kapitali 2004. aasta septembris ning ettevõtjale SA Ducroire anti lühiajaliste riskidega (sealhulgas turukõlblike riskidega) seotud tegevus üle 1. jaanuaril 2005.
It emerges that the ONDD, making financial projections for the future Ducroire/Delcredere in 2004, based them on the past performance of the activity in question (short-term risks, including marketable risks) as carried on by the ONDD.
Kõnealune meede:
Assumptions regarding premiums and costs were also based mainly on historical financial data from the previous five years, apart from a few adjustments linked to changes in market circumstances, such as a reduction applied to premiums for risks that became marketable in 2004 following the accession of ten new Member States to the European Union.
on võetud vastu pärast 17. septembrit 1998, st kuupäeva, millal Belgia kinnitas ekspordikrediidikindlustust käsitleva teatise ja kohustus mitte lubama uue abi andmist; ja
Moreover, it is clear from internal memos that it was envisaged that the entire paid-up capital of EUR 100 million should be absorbed mainly through the gradual growth until the end of 2007 (see recital (61)) of the activities performed by the ONDD in the past, in other words organic growth of existing activities (no expansion into other, more profitable activities was planned in 2004).
ei kuulu nõukogu 22. märtsi 1999. aasta määruse (EÜ) nr 659/1999 (millega kehtestatakse üksikasjalikud eeskirjad EÜ asutamislepingu artikli 93 kohaldamiseks) artiklis 15 sätestatud aegumistähtaja kohaldamisalasse, kuivõrd meetme vastuvõtmisest on möödunud vähem kui kümme aastat.
No plans were drawn up at the time for the use of the subscribed capital that had not been paid up (EUR 50 million), hence no projection was produced on the expected profitability of this capital.
36,6 miljoni euro suuruse kapitali osa näol, mille ettevõtjale SA Ducroire eraldas ONDD ning millest komisjonile eelnevalt ei teatatud, on tegemist uue ebaseadusliku abiga.
Moreover, neither the acquisition of KUP nor a broader acquisition strategy was taken into account when transferring the capital to Ducroire/Delcredere.
Uus teatis liikmesriikidele, mis käsitleb Euroopa Liidu toimimise lepingu artiklite 107 ja 108 kohaldamist lühiajalise ekspordikrediidikindlustuse suhtes (edaspidi „uus ekspordikrediidikindlustust käsitlev teatis”) avaldati 19. detsembril 2012 ja seda kohaldatakse alates 1. jaanuarist 2013.
The only ex ante financial projections produced by the ONDD were confined to a three-year period (the first three years of operation of the future Ducroire/Delcredere, namely 2005, 2006 and 2007), a relatively short period from the point of view of a private investor.
Kõnealused abid kahjustavad vastuvaidlematult kindlustusandjate vahelist konkurentsi, kuid eeskätt „põhjustavad need muutusi eri liikmesriikide tururiskide puhul kättesaadavas kindlustuskaitses, moonutades niiviisi konkurentsi liikmesriikide äriühingute vahel ja mõjutades omakorda ühendusesisest kaubandust, olenemata sellest, kas sellega on seotud ühendusesisene või väljapoole ühendust suunatud eksport.
The Commission concludes that the expected profitability of the capital was insufficient, and that therefore the EUR 36,6 million constitutes an advantage for Ducroire/Delcredere's marketable risk activity.
Asutamislepingu artiklis 92 sätestatud erandeid ei kohaldata tururiskide kindlustusele antava abi suhtes.
In the alternative, the Commission will analyse the expected profitability of the marketable risk activity in the recitals that follow.
Kõnealuse abi moonutav mõju ühenduses kaalub üles asjaolu, et ekspordi toetamine on kooskõlas siseriiklike või ühenduse huvidega” [88].
The Commission would point out that, according to Annex 9 to the strategy paper of 28 September 2004, the financial projections drawn up by the ONDD envisaged a negative result for the marketable risk activity (in other words, for the marketable risk countries according to the Communication on export-credit insurance) [78] for the entire period projected from 2005 to 2007, so that the non-marketable risk activity was subsidising the marketable risk activity.
Teisisõnu ei kohaldata kõnealuste abide suhtes ühtegi Euroopa Liidu toimimise lepingu artikli 107 lõikes 3 sätestatud erandit, eeskätt artikli 107 lõike 3 punktis c sätestatud erandit, sest need abid kahjustavad konkurentsi siseturul liiga olulisel määral.
It can be deduced, therefore, that the estimated profitability of marketable risks was lower than the estimation for all activities, which in itself was insufficient for a private investor.
Lisaks sellele ei vasta kõnealune abi Euroopa Liidu toimimise lepingu artikli 107 lõikes 3 sätestatud erandite kohaldamiseks vajalikule ühele või mitmele tingimusele.
The Commission therefore concludes that, even if the expected profitability of the marketable risk activity is analysed separately on the basis of the financial projections existing in 2004 [79], the conclusion would still be that the expected profitability was negative, and thus obviously insufficient to convince a private investor to proceed with such an investment.
Eeskätt, nagu on mainitud algatamisotsuses, ei saa kõnealuse abi näol olla tegemist abiga ettevõtja päästmiseks või ümberkorraldamiseks vastavalt ühenduse suunistele raskustes olevate äriühingute päästmiseks ja ümberkorraldamiseks antava riigiabi kohta, [89] seda eeskätt järgmistel põhjustel:
The Belgian authorities point out, for the reasons stated in recital (74), that the September 2004 projections must not be taken into account when analysing the profitability of marketable and non-marketable activities because ‘they produce absurd results’.
Belgia ametiasutused ei ole tõendanud, et ettevõtja SA Ducroire on sellise abi jaoks abikõlblik, eeskätt seda, et tegemist on raskustes oleva ettevõtjaga vastavalt ühenduse suunistele raskustes olevate äriühingute päästmiseks ja ümberkorraldamiseks antava riigiabi kohta.
The Belgian authorities say that the method developed in 2011 to separate marketable and non-marketable risks is a better reflection of the reasoning that a private investor might have followed when taking a decision in 2004.
Samuti tuleb märkida, et vastavalt kõnealuste suuniste punktile 12 ei ole vastasutatud ettevõtjad äriühingute päästmiseks ja ümberkorraldamiseks antava riigiabi jaoks abikõlblikud;
They seem to be saying, therefore, retroactively, that the 2004 projections for marketable risks [80] were based on wrong assumptions.
abi ei ole piiratud vähima vajaliku abiga.
In fact, the forecast claims experience was high but constant, whereas the forecast level of premiums (intended to remunerate the risks incurred) was very low.
Ettevõtjale SA Ducroire eraldatud kapital oli piisavalt suur, et võimaldada ettevõtjal vara omandamist.
The result was a loss ratio of 94 %.
2004. aastal ettevõtjasiseste teatiste kujul esitatud äriplaan ei hõlmanud abi saaja omaosalust;
The Commission cannot accept a retrospective modification of the projected profitability of a business activity (see recital (150)).
ettevõtja SA Ducroire jaoks koostatud äriplaan ei hõlmanud meetmeid konkurentsi kahjustamise vältimiseks.