natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Shareholders who were natural persons were not undertakings within the meaning of Article 107(1) of the Treaty and the payment of the guarantee to individual shareholders would have no impact on ARCO or the likelihood of the Belgian State recovering the aid received by these undertakings.
Komisjon märgib, et 10. oktoobri 2008. aasta ja 21. jaanuari 2009. aasta pressiteadetes kasutatud sõnastused „otsustas” ja „kohustus” viitavad ilma igasuguse kahtluseta võetud kohustusele ja annavad aluse õigustatult uskuda, et meedet asuti ellu viima.
ASSESSMENT OF THE MEASURE
Ühtlasi avaldati pressiteated ametlike kanalite kaudu:
Beneficiary of the measure
10. oktoobri 2008. aasta pressiteate saatsid välja rahandusministri talitused ning 10. jaanuari 2009. aasta pressiteade saadeti välja peaministri ja rahandusministri nimel.
However, a careful analysis of the chronology and the characteristics of the measure revealed that ARCO was the only real beneficiary from the measure as will be described in this section.
Muu hulgas täheldab komisjon meetme ajalist sidusust, kuna alates selle esmasest avaldamisest 10. oktoobril 2008 kuni kuninga dekreedi väljakuulutamiseni meede oluliselt ei muutunud.
In the case at hand, the Commission observes that there is an important difference between ARCO and the other financial cooperatives which were potentially eligible to participate in the cooperative guarantee scheme.
Euroopa Kohus kinnitas oma 19. märtsi 2013. aasta otsuses liidetud kohtuasjades C-399/10 P ja C-401/10 P, [58] et meetme väljakuulutamist ja selle tegelikku elluviimist võib käsitada ühe sekkumisena, kui seda õigustab nende ajaline järjekord, eesmärk ja ettevõtja olukord sekkumise hetkel.
From the description of the facts [55], it is clear that the cooperative guarantee scheme was from the beginning tailor-made for ARCO, which had run into trouble because of its investments in Dexia.
Lisaks seoses vaadeldava meetmega võttis Belgia 10. oktoobril 2008 vastu otsuse (mille ta ka samal päeval avaldas) veel ühe meetme kohta, mis viidi ellu hiljem ja millel oli algsele abisaajale suunatud samasugune eesmärk.
ARCO was ultimately the only financial cooperative that applied to participate in the measure.
Ka komisjon on oma otsustes käsitlenud meetme väljakuulutamist ja elluviimist ühe sekkumisena ning leiab, et see kujutas eelise andmist kohe selle avaldamise kuupäevast alates [59].
In relation to the other financial cooperatives, the Commission notes that the cooperative guarantee scheme is a voluntary scheme, that the Council of Ministers had discretion over whether and if so on what conditions to admit an applicant financial cooperative to the cooperative guarantee scheme, that none of the other financial cooperatives applied to join the cooperative guarantee scheme and that some of them actively distanced themselves from it.
Ning lõpetuseks liigitas 2014. aasta mais ametis olev rahandusminister meetme 2008. aastal võetud kohustuseks [60].
The Commission observes that the measure was decided and announced by the government on 10 October 2008 [56].
Nii Belgia kui ka Arco väitel peaks komisjon uurima asjaolu, kas Arco suhtes võetud meede kujutab riigiabi, oma muude otsuste, s.o Ethiase kohta vastu võetud otsuse alusel [61].
It is clear that the Belgian government had made the decision to offer ARCO the benefit of a cooperative guarantee scheme at the same time as the measure in favour of Dexia was designed in 2008 [57].
Riigiabi mõiste on aga objektiivne ning määratletud aluslepingus.
Another press release of 21 January 2009 further detailed the measure and after that the legal transposition of the government's commitment began.
Riigiabina on käsitatav meede, mis vastab järgmisele neljale (kumulatiivsele) riigiabi kriteeriumile:
The Commission takes note of the binding and unambiguous language in the press releases of 10 October 2008 and 21 January 2009, which used terms such as ‘décidé’ and ‘l'engagement’, thus creating a legitimate expectation as to their fulfilment.
see peab olema i) antud riigi poolt või riigi vahenditest;
The press releases were also sent out via the official channels:
andma abisaajale valikulise eelise;
the press release of 10 October 2008 was sent out by the services of the Minister of Finance, while the press release of 10 January 2009 was sent on behalf of the Prime Minister and the Minister of Finance.
Komisjon peab hindama meedet asjaomase nelja kriteeriumi alusel (vt põhjendused 94–110).
The repeated nature of the press communication strengthened the underlying message.
Riigi vahendid
The Commission notes that it was clear already at the time of the press release of 10 October 2008 that the cooperative guarantee scheme would be designed as an extension of the deposit guarantee scheme.
Komisjon peab andma hinnangu selle kohta, kas ühistute tagatisskeemi rahastati riigi vahenditest ja kas see on seostatav riigiga.
The press release of 21 January 2009 contains further technical details.
Väljakujunenud kohtupraktikast nähtub, [62] et aluslepingu artikli 107 lõige 1 hõlmab kõiki rahalisi vahendeid, mida avalik-õiguslikud asutused võivad reaalselt ettevõtjate toetamiseks kasutada, ilma et oleks oluline, kas need vahendid kuuluvad või ei kuulu püsivalt riigi vahendite hulka, tingimusel, et need on pidevalt avaliku kontrolli all ja seega pädevatele riigiasutustele kättesaadavad.
As soon as the press release of 21 January 2009 was published, ARCO put it on its website.
Eelkõige on riigiabiga tegemist juhul, kui vahendid pärinevad riigi seadustega kehtestatud sissemaksetest, mida hallatakse ja jaotatakse nimetatud seaduste kohaselt, olenemata sellest, et haldamist teostavad muud kui riigiasutused.
The latter step was clearly taken with a view to reassuring its individual shareholders.
Vaadeldavat abi andnud üksuse või ettevõtte staatust ei käsitata otsustava tegurina riigiabieeskirjade kohaldamisel.
Moreover the Commission notes the consistency of the measure over time given that the measure has not materially changed between the initial announcement on 10 October 2008 and the final Royal Decree.
Ühistute tagatisskeemi korralduse kohta märgib komisjon, et osalejate osamaksud ja vahendite kasutamise viis on määratud Belgia seadustega.
In its judgment of 19 March 2013 in Joined Cases C-399/10 P and C-401/10 P [58] the Court of Justice held that the announcement of a measure and the effective implementation can be analysed as one single intervention, if to do so is justified by the chronology and purpose of the announcement and the implementation and by the circumstances of the undertaking at the time of such intervention.
Seepärast käsitletakse erifondi tehtavaid sissemakseid riigiabina isegi juhul, kui need pärinevad eraallikatest.
Indeed, the current Belgian Minister of Finance qualified the measure in question as a commitment made in 2008 [60].
Mis puutub meetme seostamisse Belgia riigiga, siis on selge, et ühistute tagatisskeemi ei saa käsitada direktiivi 94/19/EÜ ülevõtmisena.
Based on the information in recitals 85 to 89, the Commission concludes that the announcement and the implementation of the cooperative guarantee scheme have to be dealt with as a single measure.
Asjaomase direktiiviga on liikmesriikidelt nõutud üksnes krediidiasutuste hoiuste tagamise skeemi kasutuselevõtmist ning selle artiklis 2 on selgelt sätestatud, et hoiuste tagamise skeemidega ei hüvitata vahendeid, mis on määratletud omavahenditena.
Existence of aid
Kui liikmesriik otsustab kehtestada muid hüvitisskeeme, mis tagavad muid finantstooteid, ei tulene asjaomane otsus liidu õigusest, vaid kujutab liikmesriigi enda algatust [64].
As stated in Article 107(1) of the Treaty, any aid granted by a Member State or through State resources in any form whatsoever which distorts or threatens to distort competition by favouring certain undertakings or the production of certain goods shall, insofar as it affects trade between Members States, be incompatible with the internal market, save as otherwise provided in the Treaty.
Ühtlasi märgib komisjon, et Belgia viitab küll investeeringute tagamise skeemidele, kuid see võrdlus ei ole asjakohane põhjusel, et viidatud skeemide eesmärk ei ole katta investeeringuriske.
Both the Belgian State and ARCO argue that the Commission should analyse whether ARCO received State aid by basing itself on another decision of the Commission, namely that on Ethias [61].
Nagu põhjenduses 21 on juba kirjeldatud, on asjaomaste skeemidega nähtud investoritele ette hüvitis juhuks, kui investeerimisettevõte ei suuda investori vara tagastada näiteks pettuse või ettevõtte süsteemides tekkinud probleemide tõttu.
However, State aid is an objective concept which is defined in the Treaty.
Valikuline eelis
In order to be classified as State aid, a measure has to meet the following four (cumulative) State aid criteria:
Komisjoni järelduse kohaselt andis ühistute tagatisskeem Arcole eelise.
the measure (i) should be granted by the State or through State resources;
Euroopa Kohus on nõustunud, et ettevõtetele võib anda eelise kapitalile suurema juurdepääsu vormis, kui liikmesriigis investorite kasuks võetud meede suurendab viimaste soovi paigutada oma raha sihipärastesse investeerimisprojektidesse [65].
should provide a selective advantage to the aid beneficiary;
Käesoleval juhul aitas meede Arco kontsernil säilitada olemasoleva kapitali, veendes ühistu osanikke mitte lahkuma — võttes arvesse Lehman Brothersi pankroti järgset erilist närvilisust turul, kujutas see eriti märkimisväärset eelist [66].
should (potentially) distort competition;
21. jaanuaril 2009 avaldas Arco oma veebisaidil Belgia valitsuse pressiteate, mille eesmärk oli oma osanikke rahustada.
and (iv) should affect trade between Member States.
See näitab selgelt, et võimalus rahustada investoreid kujutas endast Arco jaoks olulist eelist.
The Commission is obliged to evaluate those four criteria and will do so in recitals 94 to 110.
Seoses sellega märgib komisjon, et Arcopari 2008. aasta suvel avaldatud prospektis [67] juhiti tähelepanu ka riskile, mida rahandusühistust lahkuvad füüsilisest isikust partnerid võivad endaga kaasa tuua [68] [69].
State resources
Ka on meede selgelt valikuline.
The Commission has to assess whether the cooperative guarantee scheme is financed through State resources and is imputable to the State.
Esiteks kehtib see üksnes ühe rahandusühistu osanike ja mitte konkureerivate ettevõtete investeerimistoodete omanike suhtes.
According to settled case law [62], all financial means by which the public sector may actually support undertakings, irrespective of whether or not those means are permanent assets of the public sector, fall under Article 107(1) of the Treaty, provided that they constantly remain under public control, and remain therefore available to the competent national State.
Ettevõtted, kes pakkusid konservatiivseid võlakirju, või rahaturufondid või kapitaligarantiiga investeerimisfondid ei saanud seega pakkuda oma klientidele sarnast tagatist.
In particular, State aid is involved when funds come from contributions imposed by State legislation and when those funds are managed and apportioned in accordance with provisions of that legislation, even if they are administered by institutions separate from the State.
Belgia sõnul on rahandusühistute eraisikutest osanike osakud sisuliselt samastatavad hoiustega [70].
The status of the body or undertaking granting the aid in question is not regarded as a determining factor for the application of State aid rules.
Mitu Belgia esitatud asjaolu viitab aga ühistutele üldiselt ja mitte rahandusühistutele.
As regards the organisation of the cooperative guarantee scheme, the Commission observes that Belgian legislation determines the contributions that participants have to pay and that Belgian legislation also determines how those funds will be used.
Lisaks ei sisalda Belgia esitatud rahandusühistute osakute kirjeldus ühtegi viidet asjakohasele teabele, nagu riskid, millega on seotud nimetatud vahenditesse [71] investeerimine, mida hoiuste puhul ei ole.
Therefore, the funds of the Special Protection Fund are considered to be State resources even if they originally stemmed from private sources.
Meetme valikuline olemus väljendub ka siis, kui võrdleme rahandusühistute kohtlemist muude tegevusloaga mitterahanduslike ühistute kohtlemisega.
Moreover, if it is necessary for the Deposit and Consignment Office to do so that governmental body will advance the funds required to finance pay-outs that the Special Protection Fund is supposed to make.
Belgia tugineb rahandusühistute füüsilisest isikust partnerite erikohtlemise õigustamiseks Paint Graphose kohtuotsusele.
That aspect of the cooperative guarantee scheme creates in any event a sufficiently concrete economic risk of burdens on the budget of the Member State for State resources to be present for the purposes of Article 107(1) of the Treaty [63].
Paint Graphose puhul on tegemist eelotsusetaotlusega, mille esitas Itaalia kohtuasutus, kes soovis teada, kas tootja- ja tööühistute maksusoodustused on samastatavad riigiabiga aluslepingu artikli 107 lõike 1 tähenduses.
As regards the imputability of the measure to the Belgian State, it is clear that the cooperative guarantee scheme cannot be seen as a transposition of the DGS Directive.
Otsuses järeldas kohus, et maksusoodustust tuleb hinnata riigiabi nelja kumulatiivse kriteeriumi valguses ning andis üksikasjalikumaid juhiseid eriti selle kohta, mil viisil tuleb hinnata valikulise eelise olemasolu maksusoodustuse puhul [72].
The DGS Directive only obliges Member States to introduce a deposit guarantee scheme for deposits of credit institutions and Article 2 of that Directive explicitly provides that all instruments that fall within the definition of own funds of credit institutions are excluded from repayment by deposit guarantee schemes.
Kohus kinnitas, et vaja on teha kindlaks järgmine:
If a Member State decides to establish other repayment schemes guaranteeing other financial products, such a decision does not stem from Union law but is an initiative from the Member State itself [64].
kas maksusoodustus võib olla õigustatud maksusüsteemi eriliste tunnustega, [73] ii) kas on olemas asjakohased kontrolli- ja järelevalvemenetlused, [74] iii) kas maksusoodustus oli proportsionaalne ega ole läinud vajalikust kaugemale [75].
The Commission also observes that the Belgian State refers to the Investor Compensation Scheme but that comparison is irrelevant since investor compensation schemes are not designed to cover investment risk.
Komisjoni arvates ei ole Belgia argumentatsioon vastuvõetav, kuna antud eelise olemus on sisuliselt erinev kohtu uuritud eelisest Paint Graphose kohtuasjas.
As explained already in recital 21, investor compensation schemes are merely designed for cases where an investor firm is unable to return assets belonging to an investor for instance because of fraud or because of problems with the firm's systems.
Belgia võetud meede sisaldab eelise andmist, mitte maksu- ega lõivuvabastust.
Selective advantage
Seepärast ei saa kolmeetapilist analüüsi, millest kohus lähtus maksusoodustuse või -vabastuse valikulisuse hindamisel, käesoleval juhul kasutada.
The Commission concludes that the cooperative guarantee scheme has created a benefit for ARCO.
Kuid isegi kui Paint Graphose kohtuotsust saaks vaadeldava meetme puhul kasutada, on viimane oma eriomastest tunnustest lähtuvalt valikuline.
The Court of Justice has accepted that undertakings can obtain an advantage in the form of improved access to capital in circumstances in which a measure taken by a Member State in favour of investors increases the latter's willingness to place their money in a particular set of investment targets [65].
Esmalt märgib komisjon, et Paint Graphose juhtumis käsitletakse kõiki tootmis- ja töö ühistuid, mitte vaid ühte üsna piiratud allsektorit, nagu seda on rahandusühistute sektor.
In the case of the measure, it has helped the entities in the ARCO Group to maintain their existing capital, convincing existing cooperative shareholders not to withdraw from those financial cooperatives [66], which was a particularly important advantage in the nervous market situation which characterised the period immediately following the bankruptcy of Lehman Brothers.
Kui „päris” ühistutele tuleks näha ette erikohtlemine (nagu väidab Belgia), siis peaks see kehtima kõigi tegevusloaga ühistute suhtes.
On 21 January 2009, ARCO put a press release from the Belgian government on its website to reassure its shareholders, which clearly shows that being able to reassure investors was a major advantage for ARCO.
Pelgast asjaolust, et meede piirdub rahandusühistutega, piisab meetme käsitamiseks valikulisena.
In that regard, the Commission observes that the ARCOPAR prospectus issued in summer 2008 [67] had referred to the risk of individual shareholders leaving the financial cooperative [68] [69].
Komisjon ei võta käesolevas otsuses seisukohta selle kohta, kas maksusoodustus oli proportsionaalne või mitte, vaid leiab, et mitte miski ei õigusta seda, et äkki — 10. oktoobril 2008 — kehtestati rahandusühistute staatusega äriühingutele täiendav hüvitis või kaitse.
The measure is also clearly selective.
Viimaks kui komisjon analüüsikski olukorda Paint Graphose kohtuotsusest lähtuvalt, nagu seda soovib Belgia, siis leiab ta, et mitte miski ei õigusta 100 % tagatise andmist Arco (mis koosnes osaühingutest) füüsilisest isikust partneritele (Paint Graphose kohtuotsuse i osa).
In the first place, it only applies to holders of financial cooperative shares and not to persons holding investment products issued by competing undertakings.
Belgia äriühinguõiguse üldeeskirjade taustal oleksid Arco füüsilisest isikust partnerid osaühingu staatust arvestades pidanud olema teadlikud asjaolust, et likvideerimise korral võivad nad kaotada kogu oma kapitali [77].
Thus financial players which offered conservative bond or money market funds or capital-guaranteed mutual funds could not offer their clients a similar guarantee.
Muu hulgas ei ole rahandusühistu füüsilisest isikust partnerite märgitud kapitali sajaprotsendiline kaitsmine proportsionaalne meede (Paint Graphose kohtuotsuse analüüsi iii osa) niivõrd, kuivõrd tegemist oli osanike kaitsmisega kõigi ohtude eest.
The Belgian State argues that individual shares of financial cooperatives are in essence similar to deposits [70].
Sellega tekitati põhjendamatu eelis ettevõtetele, mille osanikud oldi [78].
However, a number of the elements which the Belgian State invoked refer to cooperatives in general not to financial cooperatives.
Konkurentsimoonutused ja liikmesriikide vahelise kaubanduse kahjustamine
In addition, the description of financial cooperative shares offered by the Belgian State does not contain references to relevant information, such as the risks of investing in those instruments [71], which are not characteristic of deposits.
Ühistute tagatisskeem annab rahandusühistutele eelise, mida jaeinvesteerimistoodete pakkujatel ega mitterahandusühistutest tegevusloaga ühistutel ei olnud.
The selective nature of the measure can also be seen when the treatment of financial cooperatives is compared to other recognised cooperatives that are non-financial.
Tänu sellele sai Arco oma turuosa kauem säilitada.
Paint Graphos was a preliminary ruling on an order for reference from an Italian court which wished to know whether tax benefits enjoyed by producers' and workers' cooperatives could be classified as State aid within the meaning of Article 107(1) of the Treaty.
Seepärast võib väita, et teised ettevõtted, kes pidid saama konkurentsitingimustes hakkama oma jõududega ega saanud loota ühistute tagatisskeemi eelistele, jäid ilma kapitalist, mida oleks saanud investeerida.
In its judgment, the Court concluded that the tax advantage had to be evaluated against the four cumulative State aid criteria and gave more detailed guidance in particular on how to evaluate whether such a tax benefit represents a selective advantage [72].
Seega moonutas ühistute tagatisskeem konkurentsi [79].
The Court held that it should be determined (i) whether such a tax benefit could be justified by the inherent characteristics of the tax system [73], (ii) whether there were appropriate control and monitoring procedures in place [74] and (iii) whether the tax benefit was proportional and did not go beyond the minimum necessary [75].
Kui liikmesriik annab mõnele ettevõttele abi, võib ettevõttesisene tegevus püsida või edasi areneda viisil, mis vähendab muude liikmesriikide ettevõtete võimalusi turule (tugevamalt) siseneda [80].
The Commission considers that the argument of the Belgian State cannot succeed because the nature of the advantage conferred by the measure is qualitatively different from that which was examined by the Court in Paint Graphos.
Võttes arvesse investeerimistoodete rahvusvaheliste pakkujate rohkust Belgia turul, võib väita, et meede avaldas ilmselgelt mõju kogu liidu kaubandusele.
The measure put in place by Belgium involves the creation of a positive benefit and not relief from a fiscal burden or from an obligation to pay a charge.
Järeldus
As such, the standard three-part analysis which the Union courts have endorsed when examining whether a fiscal advantage or exemption from a levy is selective cannot be applied to the measure.
Lähtuvalt põhjendustes 91–109 esitatud analüüsist järeldab komisjon, et riigi vahendeid hõlmav ühistute tagatisskeem kujutab valikulist eelist Arco jaoks, moonutab konkurentsi ja avaldab mõju liikmesriikidevahelisele kaubandusele.
In any event, even if the Paint Graphos analysis could be applied to the measure, the latter's specific features are such that its selective nature would remain.
Seega on täidetud kõik riigiabi kriteeriumid.
First the Commission observes that Paint Graphos refers to all producers' and workers' cooperatives, not to a relatively small subsector such as financial cooperatives.
Abi kokkusobivus
If, as Belgium claims, there should be special treatment for ‘genuine’ cooperatives, that special treatment should apply to all recognised cooperatives.
Olles sätestanud, et ühistute tagatisskeem kujutab riigiabi aluslepingu artikli 107 lõike 1 tähenduses, tuleb komisjonil kindlaks teha, kas abi võib pidada siseturuga kokkusobivaks.
The limited focus of the measure on financial cooperatives only is therefore sufficient in itself to establish the selective nature of the measure.
Aluslepingu artikli 107 lõike 1 kohaselt on igasugune riigiabi siseturuga kokkusobimatu ning seega keelatud, v.a aluslepinguga ette nähtud erandid.
Second, the Commission observes that in the view of the Belgian State, financial cooperatives seemed to deserve additional privileges as of 10 October 2008.
Lõigetes 2 ja 3 määratletakse seejärel siseturuga kokkusobivad abiliigid.
The Commission observes that prior to that date recognised cooperatives got a form of favourable treatment as a result of their special status in the form of a withholding tax exemption [76].
Artikli 107 lõikes 2 on loetletud riigiabikategooriad, mille puhul kehtib keelupõhimõttest automaatne erand; ühistute tagatisskeem ei kuulu ühessegi loetletud kategooriasse.
The Commission does not take a view in the present Decision on whether that tax advantage is proportionate but it believes that there was no reason to introduce suddenly on 10 October 2008 additional compensation for, or protection of, companies which have the status of financial cooperatives.
Artikli 107 lõikes 3 on loetletud mitmed riigiabikategooriad, mida võib pidada siseturuga kokkusobivaks.
Finally, even if the Commission were to enter into a Paint Graphos analysis as proposed by Belgium, it believes that there is no justification for providing a 100 % guarantee to individual shareholders of ARCO (i.e. part (i) of the Paint Graphos analysis), whose entities were limited liability companies.
Teoreetiliselt võiks olla kohaldatav selle punkt b või c.
Moreover, protecting 100 % of all capital subscribed by the individual shareholders of financial cooperatives is not a proportionate measure (part (iii) of the Paint Graphos analysis) as those shareholders would be shielded from any risk, which would create an undue advantage for the undertakings of which they are shareholders [78].
Samas märgib komisjon, et meede ei kuulu ühessegi suunistega hõlmatud abikategooriasse.