natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Germany pointed out that both the 1999 addendum and the 2008 amendment were concluded purely to comply with the requirements of German tax legislation and did not affect the principle of indefinite coverage of annual losses.
Seepärast oligi vaja kasutusele võtta NERES, et suurendada reisijate arvu ja taristut jälle kasutada.
Consequently, according to Germany the 2008 modification of the 1991 PLTA between FD and DSW21 was not a new measure, but still concerned the same agreement, investigated in the 2007 opening decision.
Saksamaa väitis, et tänu NERESele suutis FD erinevalt teistest lennujaamadest sel ajal reisijate arvu säilitada.
Moreover, Germany is of the opinion that the MEO principle can be applied only in the context of the situation at that time.
Peale selle keskendus Saksamaa väitel üleeuroopaline nõudlus sel ajal odavlennuettevõtjatele.
Furthermore, Germany argued that since at that time the operation and construction of airports was not considered to be an economic activity, airports were not considered to be undertakings falling within the scope of Article 107(1) of the Treaty.
Saksamaa väitis, et kuna Dortmundi lennujaama põhiklient Air Berlin paigutas oma lennud aina rohkem ümber teistesse lennujaamadesse, pidi FD kasutusele võtma stiimulid, nagu näiteks NERESe.
Germany clarified furthermore that certain operating and capital costs (depreciation and costs of financing) were falling within the public policy remit and would be outside the scope of State aid rules.
Siiski selgitas Saksamaa, et NERES ei olnud mõeldud ainult odavlennuettevõtjatele; FD oli huvitatud ka äriliinide avamisest Dortmundi lennujaamas, kuid Lufthansa ei rahuldanud FD taotlust.
In Germany's view these were costs such as police, customs, and air traffic control.
Saksamaa ütles, et NERESega ei võtnud FD riske, vaid koostas selle asemel kasumlikkuse taastamise strateegia.
Germany pointed out that the 1991 PLTA met the requirements of the Altmark [23] judgment from 24 July 2003.
Saksamaa väitis, et turumajanduse tingimustes tegutsev ettevõtja oleks toiminud samal moel, eelkõige seetõttu, et NERESe stiimulite kasutuselevõtuga sai lennujaam enda poole võita juba EasyJeti.
In its submission, Germany stated that FD was officially entrusted by the city council of Dortmund to further develop the infrastructure at Dortmund airport, and that, it was not overcompensated.
Saksamaa esitas äriplaani NERESe kasutusele võtmiseks.
Although the operation of the airport was not tendered out, according to Germany FD was on average a well-managed undertaking.
Äriplaanis võrreldi FD parimat, alus- ja halvimat stsenaariumi NERESe kasutuselevõtu korral ja ilma selleta.
Germany stated furthermore that losses of the airport included costs related to investments, which were decided prior to the 2000 Aéroports de Paris judgment and costs of public policy remit.
Iga stsenaariumi puhul eeldati, et reisijate arv kasvab 4–7 % aastas.
In this context, Germany provided at several occasions different lists of activities that were regarded as falling within the public policy remit.
Prognoos põhines lennuliiklusalgatuse (Luftverkehrsinitiative) kogu Euroopat ja maailma hõlmavatel prognoosidel.
The overview from the most recent submission is summarised in Table 4 and Table 5.
Äriplaanis prognoositi iga stsenaariumi puhul, et FD suudab ka lennundusega mitteseotud tulu kasvatada 5 % aastas.
In Germany's point of view, referring to the judgment Leipzig/Halle, these measures are outside of the scope of State aid control.
Prognoosid põhinesid 1999.–2003. aasta arengul, kui reisijate arv kasvas keskmiselt 14,39 % ning parkimistulud suurenesid samal ajal keskmiselt 27,64 %, sest parkimistasud kasvasid keskmiselt 13,25 % aastas.
According to Germany, if these costs were taken out of the cost-base, FD would have a positive EBITDA.
Peale selle tuginesid mõlemad stsenaariumid eeldusele, et FD suudab kulusid välistööjõudu kasutades kokku hoida.
In any case, Germany pointed out that the measure must not be considered as operating aid, rather but as investment aid, which can be deemed compatible with the Treaty according to Article 107(3)(b) and (c) of the Treaty.
Kõikide stsenaariumide puhul eeldati, et stiimuleid arvesse võttes suudab Dortmundi lennujaam tõsta reisijate arvu suurenemise tulemusena parkimistasusid veel 10 %.
However, Germany acknowledged that projects of common European interest within the meaning Article 107(3)(b) of the Treaty should be implemented by more than one Member State.
Saksamaa juhtis tähelepanu, et isegi halvima stsenaariumi puhul oleks stiimulite kasutuselevõtul FD tulemus parem kui ilma stiimuliteta.
Nevertheless, Germany argued that the overall structural transformation, of which the airport infrastructure construction was part, was in the common interest of the Union, and was therefore compatible with the internal market.
Saksamaa sõnul eeldati samuti, et lõpuks hakkavad Dortmundi lennujaamas tegutsema nii paljud lennuettevõtjad, et reisijate arvu kasv isegi ületab prognoose ja ootusi.
MEASURE 3: NERES
Saksamaa ütles, et NERESe stiimuleid kasutusele võttes on lennujaam tänu reisijate arvu kasvule ja tõhusamale kasutamisele kasumlikum.
Germany argued that the measures of the NERES programme could not be considered as State aid within the meaning of Article 107(1) of the Treaty.
Saksamaa esitas kõik stsenaariumid koos üksikasjadega.
Germany regarded NERES as a programme supporting the extension of Dortmund airport, for which every airline could apply, and therefore, it was not discriminatory.
Ilma stiimuleid kasutusele võtmata kasutaks Dortmundi lennujaam parima stsenaariumi korral 60 % oma läbilaskevõimsusest, mis tähendas 1,7 miljonit reisijat.
In any case, according to Germany, NERES was applied to at least three airlines and for that reason could not be considered as a de facto discrimination in favour of EasyJet.
Halvimal juhul kasutaks ta 44 % läbilaskevõimest.
Also, Germany emphasised that the programme was limited in time and applied only to airlines setting up or expanding their operation at Dortmund airport within this period.
Isegi parima stsenaariumi korral teeniks FD edasi tegevuskahjumit ning lähiaastatel ei ole paranemist oodata.
In Germany's opinion the measures of NERES were not selective because they did not give an advantage only to certain airlines.
Halvima stsenaariumi korral tegevuskahjum kõigepealt kasvab ja seejärel 2014. aasta eel tasapisi väheneb, kuid on siiski märgatavalt suurem kui 2003. aastal.
According to Germany, NERES is not imputable to the state because the management of FD established the programme of its own motion and responsibility.
Saksamaa ütles, et NERESe kasutuselevõtt oli FD jaoks kõige kasulikum võimalus võrreldes isegi Dortmundi lennujaama sulgemisega.
Germany affirmed that neither the supervisory board of FD, nor the shareholders of DSW21, nor the city of Dortmund were involved in developing NERES.
Sellega seoses esitatakse tabelis 14 NERESe kasumlikkuse suurenemise kokkuvõte.
Germany presented alternative scenarios with and without NERES and came to the conclusion that a MEO would have behaved in the same manner.
Selles tuuakse ära eeldatavad erinevused reisijate arvus, kuludes, tuludes ja FD tulemustes alternatiivsete stsenaariumidega võrreldes.
According to these scenarios, the profits with the NERES scheme were expected to be higher than without introducing it since it aimed at an increase of passengers.
Tulemused on saavutatud just tänu NERESe kasutuselevõtule.
With the NERES scheme the airport was expected to become profitable as from 2008.
Tabel 14
Germany reminded the Commission that a closure of the airport would also have caused costs and pointed out that § 45 of Air Traffic Licensing Regulation (Luftverkehrs-Zulassungs-Ordnung, ‘LuftVZO’) requests a proper operation and maintenance of an airport rather than a closure.
NERESe lisakulud, võrreldes 2000. aasta lennujaamatasude kavaga
Following the attacks on 11 September 2001, the number of passengers decreased and the market conditions changed according to Germany.
Prognoosid
Therefore, NERES needed to be introduced in order to increase the passenger numbers and utilisation of the infrastructure again.
Reisijad
Furthermore, according to Germany, the Europe-wide demand at the time concentrated on low-cost carriers.
maandumistasud
Germany argued that since Dortmund airport's main client, Air Berlin, increasingly relocated its flights to other airports, FD was forced to introduce incentives, such as NERES.
teenuste osutamine
However, Germany explained that NERES did not only target low-cost airlines; FD was also interested in establishing business airlines at Dortmund airport, but Lufthansa did not respond positively to a request of FD.
taristutulud
Germany stated that with NERES, FD did not take risks, but rather created a strategy to return to profitability.
reservid
A MEO would also have behaved in that way, Germany argued, especially because the airport could already win EasyJet with the introduction of NERES incentives.
rentimine
Germany provided the business plan that was used for the introduction of NERES.
parkimine
The business plan compared the best-case scenario, the base-case scenario and the worst-case scenario of FD with and without the introduction of NERES.
ümberjaotamine
Every scenario expected an annual passenger growth of 4-7 %.
Muud
This expectation was based on Europe-wide and global forecasts of the ‘Luftverkehrsinitiative’.
Tegevustulud kokku
These expectation were based on the development during the years 1999 to 2003, when the amount of passengers increased on average by 14,39 % and at the same time the parking revenues increased on average by 27,64 % due to an average annual increase in parking charges by 13,25 %.
Intressid ja dividenditulu
Furthermore, the scenarios relied on the assumption that FD would be able to save costs by outsourcing employees.
kokku
All of the scenarios expected that, taking into consideration the incentives, Dortmund airport would be able to increase the parking charges by another 10 %, due to the increase of passengers.
Kulud
In the best-case scenario, the airport would be expected to become fully profitable by 2015.
palgad
The worst-case scenario predicted that this increase would only be possible for the remaining time during which EasyJet stayed.
materjal
Germany pointed out that even in the worst-case scenario with the introduction of the incentives, the result of FD would be better than without incentives.
amortisatsioon
According to Germany, it was also expected that eventually so many airlines would settle at Dortmund airport that the passenger increase would even exceed the forecasts and expectations.
intressid
Germany stated that by introducing the NERES incentives, the airport would be more profitable due to an increase in passenger numbers and the higher utilisation.
tegevuskulud
Germany presented all scenarios in detail.
muu
Without the introduction of incentives, Dortmund airport would use 60 % of its capacity in the best-case scenario, which meant 1,7 million passengers.
0turundustoetus
In the worst case it would use 44 % of its capacity.
Kogukulud
Even in the best-case scenario, FD would continue to make operating losses and a recovery could not be expected in the coming years.
Toetused kokku
In the worst-case scenario, the operating losses would first increase and then slightly decrease towards 2014, but they would still be significantly higher than in 2003.
Panus EBITDAsse
Germany stated that the introduction of NERES was the most profitable option for FD, even compared to the closure of Dortmund airport.
Saksamaa sõnul on meetmete üldeesmärk tuua keskpikas kuni pikas perspektiivis suurimat võimalikku kasumit ning tasakaalustada lühiajaline kahjum tulevase kasumiga, sest eeldati, et NERESe kasutuselevõtuga muutub intressi-, maksu- ja amortisatsioonieelne kasum (välja arvatud avalike ülesannetega seotud kulud) alates 2015. aastast positiivseks.
In particular, it was more profitable than the alternative of applying the original scheme of airport charges introduced on 1 November 2000.
Saksamaa esitas ka kogukulu- ja kogutuluarvestusel põhineva prognoosi, mille kokkuvõte on toodud tabelis 15.
Germany further clarified that the assessment carried out showed that with NERES FD would be able to maximise the number of passengers, its aviation and non-aviation revenues, and its earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortisation (‘EBITDA’).
Tabel 15
In this regard, Table 14 summarises the incremental profitability results of NERES.
Prognoositud kasum või kahjum NERESe stsenaariumi puhul
It shows the expected differences in terms of number of passengers, costs, revenues and results of FD as compared to alternative scenarios.
Kokku
These results are specifically due to the introduction of NERES.
Reisijad (mln)
Table 14
Tulud (tuh EUR)
Incremental costs of NERES as compared to the 2000 scheme of charges
Kulud (tuh EUR)
Forecasts
Kasum/kahjum (tuh EUR)
Passengers
Intressi-, maksu- ja amortisatsioonieelne kasum (tuh EUR)
Revenues
Saksamaa väitis, et lennujaama sulgemine tooks kaasa 170 miljoni euro väärtuses kulusid.
Landing charges
Lennujaama sulgemist kaaludes tuli Saksamaa sõnul võtta arvesse järgmist: varade kiirendatud amortisatsioon (187 miljonit eurot), lammutustööd (8,5 miljonit) ja personali vähendamisega seotud kahjuhüvitised (14 miljonit eurot).
Provision of services
Varade, ehitiste ja seadmete müük annaks kõige rohkem 38,75 miljonit eurot.
Revenues from infrastructure
Sulgemine oleks nõudnud ka ehitiste valvet (450000 eurot aastas) ja eluaegse lepinguga töötajate ülevõtmist (1,3 miljonit eurot).
Provisions
Võrreldes lennujaama sulgemist eespool kirjeldatud stsenaariumidega oli FD tegevuse jätkamine Saksamaa arvates parem valik [24].
Renting
Saksamaa väitis, et NERESe kasutuselevõtuga kasvas Dortmundi lennujaamast kättesaadavate sihtpunktide arv 37-lt enne NERESe kasutuselevõttu kuni 53ni pärast seda.
Parking
Märkustes selgitati, et parkimistasudest saadav kasum kasvas tegelikult ootuspäraselt.
Reallocations
Personalikulud olid eeldatust kõrgemad, mis tulenes Saksamaa sõnul aga algsest kohandamisest.
Others
Saksamaa esitas arvamuse, et kui komisjon kaaluks NERESt riigiabina, oleks see ELi toimimise lepingu artikli 107 lõike 3 punkti c kohaselt kokkusobiv siseturuga, sest programm oli ühistes huvides.
Total operating revenues
Saksamaa viitas komisjoni Charleroi otsusele, väites, et piirkondlikele lennujaamadele antav riigiabi võib aidata neid arendada ja aidata sel moel vähendada rahvusvaheliste lennujaamade ülekoormatust.
Other revenues
Saksamaa asus seisukohale, et NERES soodustas ka teatavate majandustegevuse liikide arendamist, täpsemalt arvukamate lennuliinide avamise kaudu Dortmundi lennujaamast ja seega üleeuroopalise konkurentsi ja kaubanduse tugevdamise kaudu.
Interests and dividend income
Peale selle juhtis Saksamaa tähelepanu asjaolule, et maapealse teenindusega kaeti alati nende kulusid.
revenues
Saksamaa rõhutas programmi vajalikkust, juhtides tähelepanu asjaolule, et tänu stiimulite kasutuselevõtule hakkas Dortmundis tegutsema rohkem odavlennuettevõtjaid.
Costs
Kui vaadata reisijate arvu 2004. ja 2006. aastal, siis see peaaegu kahekordistus 1,15 miljonilt kuni 2,02 miljoni reisijani.
Salaries and wages
Samuti nentis Saksamaa, et lendude arv kasvas 30 % ja regulaarlendude arv 36 %.
Material
MEEDE 4: NEO
Depreciation
Seoses NEOga väitis Saksamaa, et võttes vastu otsuse NEO kasutuselevõtu kohta, toimis FD turumajanduse tingimustes tegutseva ettevõtjana.
Interests
Saksamaa ütles veel kord, et isegi lennujaama sulgemisega võrreldes jääks NEO kasutuselevõtt edaspidi kõige kasulikumaks variandiks.
Other
Tabelites tuuakse ära eeldatavad erinevused reisijate arvus, kuludes, tuludes ja FD tulemustes alternatiivsete stsenaariumidega võrreldes.
contributions
Tulemused on saavutatud just tänu NEO kasutuselevõtule.
Total costs
Tabel 16
Total contribution
NEO lisakulud võrreldes 2000. aasta lennujaamatasude kavaga
Contribution to EBITDA
lennundusega seotud
Germany stated that the overall aim of the measures was to generate the highest possible medium to long-term profits and that short-term losses would be balanced by the profits in the future as the introduction of NERES was expected to lead to a positive EBITDA (excluding costs falling within public policy remit) as from 2015 onwards.
lennundusega mitteseotud
Germany also provided forecasts based on the total cost and total revenue calculations, as summarised in Table 15.
tulud kokku
Table 15
muud tulud
total
palgad
Passengers (million)
ostud
Revenues ('000 EUR)
amortisatsioon
Costs ('000 EUR)
intressimäär
Profit/Loss ('000 EUR)
tegevuskulud
EBITDA ('000 EUR)
muud kulud
Germany furthermore argued that after the introduction of NERES, positive effects could be seen already in the second half of 2004.
0kogukulud
In 2005, losses of Dortmund airport had been already reduced by 8,5 % compared to 2004.
Tabel 17
Germany provided an updated business plan for FD which expected a positive development for the upcoming years and a return to profitability in terms of EBITDA level by 2011.
NEO lisakulud, võrreldes kombineeritud kavaga
When considering a closure of the airport, according to Germany, the following had to be taken into account: the accelerated depreciation for assets (EUR 187 million), demolitions (8,5 million), and indemnities due to personnel reductions (EUR 14 million).
Sellega seoses selgitab Saksamaa, et lühiajaline kahjum tasakaalustataks tulevase kasumiga, sest eeldati, et NEO kasutuselevõtuga muutub intressi-, maksu- ja amortisatsioonieelne kasum (välja arvatud avalike ülesannetega seotud kulud) alates 2016. aastast positiivseks.
The sale of the property, buildings and equipment would yield at most EUR 38,75 million.
Saksamaa esitas ka kogukulu- ja kogutuluarvestusel põhineva prognoosi, mille kokkuvõte on esitatud tabelis 18 ja 19.
A closure would have also required a surveillance of the buildings (EUR 450000 per year) and the takeover of the employees with a life-term contract (EUR 1,3 million).
Tabel 18
Comparing the closure of the airport with the scenarios above, a continuation of activities of FD was the better alternative, Germany concluded [24].
Prognoositud kasum või kahjum NEO stsenaariumi puhul
Germany declared that with the introduction of NERES, the number of destinations available from Dortmund airport increased from 37 before NERES to 53 destinations thereafter.
Tulu (tuh EUR)
The submissions made clear that the profits from parking charges in fact increased as expected.
Kulu (tuh EUR)
Personnel costs were higher than expected, which was due, however, to the initial adjustment, according to Germany.
Kasum/kahjum (tuh EUR)
According to the submissions, the overall results of the airport in 2004 were EUR — 20995000 and EUR — 24111000 in 2005.
[– 9000 kuni – 11000]
These results were better than the best expected scenario without the introduction of incentives, but also slightly below the base-case scenario with the introduction of NERES incentives.
[– 8000 kuni – 10000]
Germany put forward that if the Commission would consider NERES as State aid, it would be compatible with the Treaty on the basis of Article 107(3)(c) of the Treaty, because the programme was in the common interest.
[– 8000 kuni – 10000
Germany referred to the Commission's decision Charleroi, arguing that State aid for regional airports could help developing these and in that way help reducing congestion at international airports.
[– 6000 kuni – 8000]
Germany took the view that NERES also facilitated the development of certain economic activities, namely through establishing more routes from Dortmund airport, and therefore, strengthening Europe-wide competition and trade.
[– 6000 kuni – 8000
Furthermore, Germany pointed out that ground handling activities always covered their costs.
[– 4000 kuni – 6000]
Germany underlined the necessity of the programme, pointing out that through the introduction of incentives, more low-cost airlines settled at Dortmund airport.
[– 2000 kuni – 4000]
Looking at the number of passengers in 2004 and 2006, the number almost doubled from 1,15 million to 2,02 million passengers.
[– 2000 kuni – 4000]
Germany stated also that the number of aircraft movements increased by 30 % and the number of scheduled flights increased by 36 %.
Tabel 19
MEASURE 4: NEO
Prognoosi alusel kohandatud kasum või kahjum NEO stsenaariumi puhul
With regard to NEO, Germany submitted that FD acted as a MEO when deciding to introduce NEO.
Korrigeeritud FD kehtestatud lennujuhtimistasuga, et katta (osaliselt) lennujuhtimise kui avaliku teenuse kulud.
Just as for NERES, Germany argued that also the NEO schedule was the most profitable option for FD, compared to the alternative scenarios such as no introduction of NEO or a mixture of NEO and the original 2000 scheme.
See kohustus, mida tavaliselt täidab otse DFS, anti üle FD-le, kes võttis selle eest tasu otse.
Germany further clarified that the assessment carried out showed that under this option FD would be able to maximise the number of passengers, its aviation and non-aviation revenues, and its EBITDA.
Kohandatud (esmalt) kooskõlas avaliku teenuse kuludega, eelkõige avaliku teenusega seotud palkadega, ning ELi määrusega (EÜ) nr 300/2008; DFS/TTC/lennujuhtide/lähilennujuhtimisüksuse, tuletõrje kulutused materjalile ja (teiseks) varasemate taristumeetmetega seotud amortisatsiooni ja intresside kulud, sealhulgas viivisintress seoses ehitusarvete hilinenud tasumisega ning muud varasemate investeeringutega seotud kulud, eelkõige taristuga seotud kinnisvaramaksud, maamaks, sealhulgas varasemate taristuinvesteeringute proportsionaalsed kulud.
Germany stated again that even compared to the closure of the airport, the introduction of NEO would still remain the most profitable option for the way forward.
Kasum/kahjum (tuh EUR)
In this regard Table 16 and Table 17 summarise the incremental profitability results of NEO.
Intressi-, maksu- ja amortisatsioonieelne kasum (tuh EUR)
They show the expected differences in terms of number of passengers, costs, revenues and results of FD as compared to alternative scenarios.
[0 kuni – 2000]
These results are specifically due to the introduction of NEO.
Peale selle märkis Saksamaa, et tegelikud tulemused kinnitavad NEO prognoose, nagu on näidatud tabelis 20.
Table 16
Tabel 20
Incremental costs of NEO as compared to the 2000 scheme of charges
NEO tegelikud tulemused
aviation
Allikas:
non-aviation
Dr. Bergmann, Kauffmann und Partner GmbH & Co.KG Wirtschaftsprüfungsgesellschaft: Flughafen Dortmund GmbH – Bericht über die Prüfung des Jahresabschlusses und des Lageberichtes zum 31.12.2012 (esitanud Saksamaa).
total — revenues
Reisijate arv
other revenues
tuh EUR
interest rate and dividend income
Kogutulem
salaries and wages
Intressi-, maksu- ja amortisatsioonieelne kasum
purchases
[– 7000 kuni – 9000]
depreciation
Peale selle esitas Saksamaa NEOga kasutusele võetud ühtse starditasu, mis olenes lennuettevõtja reisijate arvust.
interest rate
Sellega seoses väitis Saksamaa, et suurem reisijate arv tooks kaasa suurema lennundus- ja eelkõige lennundusega mitteseotud tulu, ning et see õigustab suuremaid allahindlusi.
operating costs
Saksamaa väitis, et kõik tasud põhinevad NEO-l – isegi kui FD sõlmiks lennuettevõtjatega eraldi lepinguid.
other costs
Seepärast on Saksamaa arvamusel, et NEO on läbipaistev.
costs
Saksamaa selgitas lisaks, et FD makstud tasude võrdlemine selle läheduses asuvate teiste lennujaamade tasudega ei ole kohane.
Table 17
Saksamaa on arvamusel, et komisjon ei kontrollinud, kuidas määrati kindlaks nende lennujaamade tasud.
Incremental costs of NEO as compared to the mixed scheme
Pealegi tuleb Saksamaa sõnul tasude puhul arvesse võtta lennujaamade erinevaid ärimudeleid (nagu näiteks otselennud vs lennud sõlmlennujaamade kaudu või odavlennud), samuti piirkondlikke erinevusi.
Germany stated that the overall aim of the measures was to generate the highest possible medium to long-term profits.
Lisaks väidab Saksamaa, et maapealse teeninduse tasude üle peeti eraldi läbirääkimisi, et võtta arvesse eri lennuettevõtjate nõutavat teenustaset.