natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
In principle, the function of a tax ruling is to establish in advance the application of the ordinary tax system to a particular case, given a set of facts and circumstances specific to that case, for a certain period of time and provided that there is no material change over the application of the ruling in that specific set of facts and circumstances.
Kokkuvõttes, kui on võimalik tõendada, et Luksemburgi maksuameti vastuvõetud vaidlusaluses maksuotsuses sisalduv meetod, mida kasutatakse FFT Luksemburgis maksustatava kasumi suuruse kindlaksmääramiseks, erineb meetodist, mille abil on võimalik saada usaldusväärne turutingimustel põhinev hinnang ja sellega seoses reaalturuväärtuse põhimõttele vastav tulemus, käsitatakse vaadeldavat maksuotsust meetmena, mille abil antakse FFT-le valikuline eelis Euroopa Liidu toimimise lepingu artikli 107 lõike 1 tähenduses, kuna selle kohaldamisega vähendatakse FFT Luksemburgis äriühingu tulumaksu üldise süsteemi alusel tasutavat maksusummat võrreldes integreerimata äriühingutega, kelle maksubaas määratakse kindlaks kasumi põhjal, mida nad teenivad turutingimustel.
Where a tax ruling is based on a method of assessment that deviates from what would result from a normal application of the ordinary tax system without justification, that ruling will be considered to confer a selective advantage upon its beneficiary, in so far as that selective treatment results in the lowering of that beneficiary's tax liability in the Member State concerned as compared to companies in a similar legal and factual situation.
Sissejuhatav märkus: fikseeritud suurusega maksubaasi suhtes väljendatud kahtlused
An advantage pursuant to Article 107(1) of the TFEU is any economic benefit that an undertaking would not have obtained under normal market conditions, i.e. in the absence of the State intervention [106].
Komisjoni menetluse algatamise otsuses väljendatud esimene kahtlus hõlmas asjaolu, et vaidlusaluse maksuotsuse põhjal tundus FFT maksubaas olevat seotud fikseeritud suurusega vahemikuga.
Thus, whenever the financial situation of an undertaking is improved as a result of a State intervention, an advantage is present.
Lisaks sellele ilmneb menetluse käigus esitatud dokumentidest, et FFT maksubaasi suurus oli määratud kindlaks suuruses 2 miljonit eurot aastas enne vaidlusaluse maksuotsuse vastuvõtmist.
Such improvement is shown by comparing the financial situation of the undertaking as a result of the contested measure with the financial situation of that undertaking had the measure not been granted [108].
Kuigi FFT-l oli ringkirja kohaselt kohustus uuendada oma varasema maksuotsuse taotlust siirdehindade aruande põhjal, andis vaidlusaluse maksuotsuse jaoks koostatud siirdehindade aruanne maksubaasi jaoks peaaegu sama tulemuse, mis oli kindlaks määratud varasemalt.
An advantage can consist both in the granting of positive economic advantages as well as in the mitigation of charges normally included in the budget of an undertaking [109].
Samas, võttes arvesse haldusmenetluse käigus Luksemburgi antud selgitusi, mille kohaselt vaidlusalune maksuotsus hõlmas meetodit ja mitte kindlaksmääratud vahemikku, [116] ning arvestades samuti andmeid, mille kohaselt FFT 2012. ja 2013. aasta maksubaas oli väiksem kui kõnealuse maksuotsusega väidetavalt sätestatud vahemiku alampiir, [117] leiab komisjon, et need kahtlused on nõuetekohaselt hajutatud.
As explained in recitals 52 et seq., by the contested tax ruling, Luxembourg accepted a methodology for determining FFT's taxable profit in Luxembourg, as proposed by the latter's tax advisor in the transfer pricing report, which allows FFT to determine its corporate income tax liability in Luxembourg on a yearly basis for the period during which that ruling is valid.
Vaidlusalusest maksuotsusest tulenevad metodoloogilised valikud, kohandused ja korrigeerimised
More specifically, the transfer pricing report endorsed by the contested tax ruling determines, in the absence of transactions dictated by the market as would exist for a non-integrated independent company, the profit to be allocated to that company of the Fiat group and which translates into the pricing of the transactions it concludes with the other group companies of the Fiat group.
Vaidlusaluses maksuotsuses on FFT kasuks rakendatud meetodit äriühingu kasumi jaotamiseks, mis tugineb kõnealuse äriühingu maksunõustaja tehtud siirdehindade analüüsile, milles on välja arvutatud kontsernisisese rahastamisega ja rahaliste vahendite haldamisega seotud ülesannete täitmise eest ja äriühingu kantavate riskide eest saadav hüvitis.
The Court of Justice has already held that a reduction in the taxable base that results from a tax measure that enables a taxpayer to employ transfer prices in intra-group transactions that do not resemble prices which would be charged in conditions of free competition between independent undertakings negotiating under comparable circumstances at arm's length confers a selective advantage on that taxpayer, by virtue of the fact that its tax liability under the ordinary tax system is reduced as compared to independent companies which rely on their accounting profits to determine their taxable base [110].
Kõnealusest siirdehindade analüüsist nähtub mitu metoodikaga seotud valikut: i) otsus kasutada FFT Luksemburgis maksustatava kasumi suuruse hindamiseks tehingupõhise tootluse meetodit; ii) otsus valida tehingupõhise tootluse meetodi jaoks kasuminäitajaks kapital; iii) otsus kasutada kapitali arvutamise jaoks Basel II raamistikku; ja iv) otsus kasutada aktsiahindadel põhinevat finantsvarade hindamise mudelit omakapitali nõutava tootluse kindlaksmääramiseks.
In its judgment on the Belgian tax regime for coordination centres [111], the Court of Justice assessed a challenge to a Commission decision which concluded, inter alia, that the method for determining taxable income under that regime conferred a selective advantage on those centres [112].
Nagu on selgitatud allpool esitatud põhjendustes 241–301, toimus valik i viie meetodi vahel, mida on üksikasjalikult kirjeldatud ja vaadeldud OECD juhistes.
Under that regime, taxable profits were set at a flat-rate amount which represented a percentage of the full amount of operating costs and expenses, from which staff costs and financial charges were excluded.
OECD juhised on samuti seotud tehingupõhise tootluse meetodi kohaldamiseks kasuminäitaja valikuga ii.
According to the Court, ‘in order to decide whether a method of assessment of taxable income such as that laid down under the regime for coordination centres confers an advantage on them, it is necessary, […], to compare that regime with the ordinary tax system, based on the difference between profits and outgoings of an undertaking carrying on its activities in conditions of free competition.’
Seevastu valikud iii ja iv ei ole kõnealuste juhistega seotud.
The Court then held that ‘the effect of the exclusion of [staff costs and the financial costs] from the expenditure which serves to determine the taxable income of the centres is that the transfer prices do not resemble those which would be charged in conditions of free competition’, which the Court found to ‘[confer] an advantage on the coordination centres’ [113].
Seejärel valis FFT maksunõustaja mitmed parameetrid, st reaalsed arvandmed, mida kasutati hüvitamisele kuuluva omakapitali suuruse kindlaksmääramiseks [valik iii)] ja omavahendite nõutava tootluse määratlemiseks [valik iv)].
The Court has thus accepted that a tax measure which results in a group company charging transfer prices that do not reflect those which would be charged in conditions of free competition, that is prices negotiated by independent undertakings negotiating under comparable circumstances at arm's length, confers an advantage on that group company, in so far as it results in a reduction of its taxable base and thus its tax liability under the ordinary corporate income tax system.
Hüvitatava omakapitali suuruse kindlaksmääramiseks valis maksunõustaja parameetrid riskide kaalumiseks ja nõutavate minimaalsete omavahendite jaoks, et hinnata FFT hüpoteetiliste regulatiivsete omavahendite suurust.
The principle that transactions between intra-group companies should be remunerated as if they were agreed to by independent companies negotiating under comparable circumstances at arm's length is generally referred to as the ‘arm's length principle’.
Kõnealuse omakapitali suhtes kohaldatava nõutava tootluse määra puhul valis maksunõustaja parameetrid seoses riskivaba määra, beeta ja turupreemiaga, mis olid vajalikud finantsvarade hindamise mudeli kohaldamiseks [118].
In the Belgian coordination centres judgment, the Court of Justice endorsed the arm's length principle as the benchmark for establishing whether a group company receives an advantage for the purposes of Article 107(1) of the TFEU as a result of a tax measure that determines its transfer pricing and thus its taxable base.
Lõpuks tegi maksunõustaja otsuse mitte võtta arvesse FFT omakapitali kogusuurust turuväärtuse põhimõttele vastava hüvitise suuruse kindlaksmääramisel; selle jaoks arvas ta kõnealusest omakapitalist maha FFT osalemise FFNA ja FFC omakapitalis ja arvutas hüvitise äriühingu täidetavate ülesannete eest ülejäänud summa põhjal [119].
The purpose of the arm's length principle is to ensure that transactions between group companies are treated for tax purposes by reference to the amount of profit that would have arisen if the same transactions had been executed by independent companies.
Need valikud ei tundu samas tuginevat kõnealustele parameetritele.
Otherwise, group companies would benefit from a favourable treatment under the ordinary corporate income tax system when it comes to the determination of their taxable profits that is not available to independent companies, leading to unequal treatment between companies that are factually and legally in a similar situation in light of the objective of such a system, which is to tax the profits of all companies falling under its tax jurisdiction.
Pigem tundub, et nende valikute abil kohandatakse kasutatavat meetodit, nii et see võimaldab määrata FFT kasuks äriühingu kasumi sellise jaotumise, mis ei vasta mitte ühelegi üldiselt kohaldatavale meetodile.
The Commission's assessment of whether Luxembourg granted a selective advantage to FFT must therefore consist in verifying whether the methodology accepted by the Luxembourg tax administration by way of the contested ruling for the determination of FFT's taxable profits in Luxembourg departs from a methodology that leads to a reliable approximation of a market-based outcome and thus from the arm's length principle.
Kõnealuste metoodikaga seotud valikute, nende rakendamiseks valitud parameetrite ning korrigeerimiste […] tulemusel leiab maksunõustaja FFT kontsernisisese rahastamise ja rahaliste vahendite haldamise eest makstava hüvitise suuruse, mis kajastub vaidlusaluses maksuotsuses ja mis väidetavalt on kooskõlas ringkirja ja reaalturuväärtuse põhimõttega.
In so far as the methodology Luxembourg accepted by the contested tax ruling results in a lowering of FFT's tax liability under the general Luxembourg corporate income tax system as compared to non-integrated companies whose taxable profit under that system is determined by the market, that ruling will be deemed to confer a selective advantage to FFT for the purposes of Article 107(1) of the TFEU.
Põhjendustes 241–301 selgitab komisjon põhjusi, mis on viinud ta arusaamisele, et mitmed valitud meetodid, parameetrid ja […] korrigeerimised on vähendanud FFT Luksemburgis äriühingu tulumaksu süsteemi alusel tasutavat maksusummat võrreldes integreerimata äriühingutega tasutava maksusummaga, kelle maksukoormuse määravad kindlaks turutingimustel tehtud tehingud, ning miks käsitatakse neid valikuid ja korrigeerimisi kajastavat vaidlusalust maksuotsust meetmena, mille abil antakse FFT-le valikuline eelis Euroopa Liidu toimimise lepingu artikli 107 lõike 1 tähenduses, mis kaldub kõrvale reaalturuväärtuse põhimõttest.
The arm's length principle therefore necessarily forms part of the Commission's assessment under Article 107(1) of the TFEU of tax measures granted to group companies, independently of whether a Member State has incorporated this principle into its national legal system.
Tehingupõhise tootluse meetodi valik ja siirdehindade aruandes esitatud funktsionaalne analüüs
It is used to establish whether the taxable profits of a group company for corporate income tax purposes has been determined on the basis of a methodology that approximates market conditions, so that that company is not treated favourably under the general corporate income tax system as compared to non-integrated companies whose taxable profit is determined by the market.
Seoses valikuga i tuleb märkida, et vaidlusaluses maksuotsuses esitatud FFT täidetavate ülesannete eest ja kantava riski eest arvestatava hüvitise suuruse hindamise teostas maksunõustaja tehingupõhise tootluse meetodi abil [120].
Thus, for any avoidance of doubt, the arm's length principle that the Commission applies in its State aid assessment is not that derived from Article 9 of the OECD Model Tax Convention, which is a non-binding instrument, but is a general principle of equal treatment in taxation falling within the application of Article 107(1) of the TFEU, which binds the Member States and from whose scope the national tax rules are not excluded [114].
See valik tehti viie meetodi vahel, mida on üksikasjalikult kirjeldatud ja vaadeldud OECD juhistes.
Consequently, in response to Luxemburg's argument that the Commission, in undertaking such an assessment, replaces the national tax authorities in the interpretation of Luxembourg law [115], the Commission recalls that is not examining whether the contested ruling complies with the arm's length principle as laid down in Article 164(3) L.I.R. or the Circular, but whether the Luxembourg tax administration conferred a selective advantage on FFT for the purposes of Article 107(1) of the TFEU by issuing a tax ruling that endorses a profit allocation that departs from the amount of profit that would have been taxed under the general Luxembourg corporate income tax system if the same transactions had been executed by independent companies negotiating under comparable circumstances at arm's length.
Üldpõhimõttena on kõnealustes juhistes nõutud, et siirdehindade konkreetses kontekstis kasutataks kõige sobivamat meetodit, et määrata kindlaks hind, mis peegeldab reaalturuväärtuse põhimõtte rakendamist [121].
Finally, in response to the argument of Luxembourg and FFT that, because transfer pricing is not an exact science, the assessment by the Commission of the transfer pricing arrangement agreed in the contested tax ruling should necessarily be limited, the Commission recalls that the approximation component of transfer pricing has to viewed in the light of its objective.
Teatud meetodi kohaldamine nõuab lisaks sellele ühe või mitme parameetri kasutamist, et meetodi abil saadud tulemus oleks asjakohane.
While the OECD TP Guidelines do indeed acknowledge that transfer pricing is not an exact science in paragraph 1.13 thereof, that same point first explains that ‘[i]t is important not to lose sight of the objective to find a reasonable estimate of an arm's length outcome based on reliable information’.
Meetodi valik ja parameetrite kindlaksmääramine ei saa toimuda meelevaldselt.
The objective of the OECD TP Guidelines is to develop, for the benefit of tax administrations and multinational enterprises, the most appropriate methods for estimating arm's length prices of cross-border transactions between associated enterprises for taxation purposes.
Nende valikute jätmine täies ulatuses maksukohustuslase otsustada soodustaks integreeritud piiriüleseid kontserne võrreldes äriühingutega, kes teevad tehinguid turutingimustel: esimestel oleks oma maksubaasi arvutamiseks võimalik ise valida kontsernisiseste tehingute hindade kindlaksmääramiseks kasutatav meetod ja parameetrid, samas kui teised teevad tehinguid turutingimustel ning neil puudub võimalus oma maksubaasi korrigeerida.
The pursuit of that objective would be impossible if the approximative nature of the transfer pricing exercise could be used to disregard the consensus on appropriate transfer pricing methodologies which those guidelines represent.
Seetõttu peavad need valikud juhinduma eesmärgist, et kontsernisisesed tehingud oleksid vastavuses reaalturuväärtuse põhimõttega.
The approximative nature of the arm's length principle can therefore not be invoked to justify a transfer pricing analysis that is either methodologically inconsistent or based on an inadequate comparables selection.
Samas, kui siirdehindade kindlaksmääramisel lähtutakse reaalturuväärtuse põhimõttest, ei anta ka asjakohasuse seisukohalt paremuselt teise meetodi kohaldamisel üldjuhul eelist integreeritud piiriülestele kontsernidele.
In conclusion, if it can be shown that the methodology accepted by the Luxembourg tax administration by way of the contested ruling for the determination of FFT's taxable profits in Luxembourg departs from a methodology that leads to a reliable approximation of a market-based outcome and thus from the arm's length principle, that ruling will be found to confer a selective advantage on FFT for the purposes of Article 107(1) of the TFEU, in so far as it leads to a lowering of FFT's tax liability under the general Luxembourg corporate income tax system as compared to non-integrated companies whose tax base is determined by the profits they generate under market conditions.
Kui sellise meetodi kohaldamisel kasutatakse eriti suure ettevaatusega valitud parameetreid, võib arvutatav hüvitis anda ikkagi tulemuse, mis on antud konkreetsel juhul võrdne turutingimustele vastava tulemusega, või anda tulemuseks ülemäärase maksukoormuse, mille korral sellist teist meetodit kasutava maksuotsusega ei anta mingit eelist Euroopa Liidu toimimise lepingu artikli 107 lõike 1 tähenduses.
Preliminary observation: doubt expressed on the existence of a fixed tax base
(244) Seevastu isegi juhul, kui kasutatakse kõige asjakohasemat meetodit ja seejuures valitakse erakordselt soodsad parameetrid, võib selle meetodi abil arvutatud hüvitise suurus olla seotud maksukohustuslase tasutava maksusumma alahindamisega ning talle eelise andmisega Euroopa Liidu toimimise lepingu artikli 107 lõike 1 tähenduses.
The first doubt expressed by the Commission in the Opening Decision was that FFT's tax base as agreed to by the contested tax ruling appeared to constitute a fixed range.
Menetluse algatamise otsuses väljendas komisjon kahtlusi seoses asjaoluga, et tehingupõhise tootluse meetodi näol võib olla tegemist mitte kõige asjakohasema meetodiga reaalturuväärtuse põhimõttele vastava hüvitise ja sellest tulenevalt FFT maksustatava kasumi kindlaksmääramiseks.
In addition, the documents submitted during the formal investigation show that FFT's tax base had been fixed at EUR 2 million annually before the contested tax ruling was issued.
Võrreldes siirdehindade valdkonnas kohaldatavates OECD juhistes esitatud nelja ülejäänud meetodiga on vabaturu hinna meetod kõige otsesem ja annaks kohaldamise korral turutingimustele vastava tulemuse suhtes kõige usaldusväärsema ligikaudse väärtuse.
Although the Circular required FFT to renew its previous ruling request on the basis of a transfer pricing report, the transfer pricing report prepared for the contested tax ruling reached an outcome in terms of tax base, which is practically identical to the previously agreed lump sum amount.
Samas nõustub komisjon, võttes arvesse ametliku uurimismenetluse käigus edastatud teavet, FFT väitega, mille kohaselt vabaturu hinna meetod võib osutuda FFT puhul mitte kõige asjakohasemaks meetodiks.
However, on the basis of a clarification provided by Luxembourg during the administrative procedure, explaining that the contested tax ruling agrees on a methodology and not on a fixed range [116], as well as data demonstrating that for 2012 and 2013 FFT's tax base was lower than the lower bound of the range that was allegedly agreed in that ruling [117], the Commission considers that doubt to have been adequately resolved.
Sellest teabest ilmneb, et FFT teeb tehinguid Fiati kontserni erinevate tehinguosalistega ning et kohaldatavad intressimäärad, antavate laenude liik ja tähtajad ning FFT väljastatud võlakirjad on erinevad, seda isegi juhul, kui vastavate finantsinstrumentide liik ei tundu olevat erinev.
Methodological choices, parameters and adjustments underlying the contested tax ruling
Võttes arvesse asjaolu, et vabaturu hinna meetodi kohaldamisel siirdehindade kindlaksmääramiseks tuleks leida iga FFT antud laenu puhul võrreldav tehing, tundub maksunõustaja kasutatud tehingupõhise tootluse meetod reaalturuväärtuse põhimõttele vastava hüvitise hindamiseks FFT täidetavate ülesannete ja kantavate riskide eest asjakohane.
The contested tax ruling accepts a methodology for determining a profit allocation to FFT, which is based on a transfer pricing analysis prepared by the latter's tax advisor that calculates a remuneration for the intra-group financing and treasury functions performed and the risk borne by FFT.
Komisjon tunnistab lisaks sellele, et FFTga seotud siirdehindade analüüs põhineb omakapitali tootlusel, mis on finantssektori puhul vastuvõetav tootluse näitaja, ning nõustub sellega, et FFT täidetavaid ülesandeid on võimalik võrrelda finantseerimisasutuste omadega.
Several methodological choices underlie that transfer pricing analysis: (i) the choice to use the TNMM to estimate FFT's taxable profit in Luxembourg; (ii) the choice of capital as profit level indicator in the application of the TNMM; (iii) the choice of the Basel II framework to calculate that capital and (iv) the choice of the CAPM based on equity prices to determine a required return on that capital.
FFT varade ja kohustuste struktuuri keerukus näitab, et äriühingu ülesannete hulka kuulub võlatähtaegade muutmine ja finantsvahendus ning ta kasutab välisinvestoreid kontserni rahastamisvajaduste rahuldamiseks [122].
As explained in the following sections, in recitals 241 to 301, choice (i) is a choice between the five methods described and discussed in detail in the OECD Guidelines.
Komisjon leiab sellega seoses, et tehingupõhise tootluse meetodi kasutamise näol siirdehindade kindlaksmääramiseks on FFT puhul tegemist asjakohase valikuga.
The OECD Guidelines also discuss choice (ii) of a profit level indicator when using the TNMM.
Hüvitatava omakapitali suurus
However, subsequent methodological choices (iii) and (iv) are not covered by the OECD Guidelines.
Samas kui komisjon peab maksunõustaja kasutatud tehingupõhise tootluse meetodit FFT puhul asjakohaseks, on ta siiski seisukohal, et mitmed maksunõustaja tehtud metodoloogilised valikud, parameetrite valikud ja […] korrigeerimised meetodi kohaldamisel ei ole FFT maksubaasi suuruse arvutamiseks Luksemburgis sobilikud.
FFT's tax advisor then proceeds to a selection of several parameters, i.e. actual figures, for use in estimating the amount of capital to be remunerated (in relation to choice (iii)) and the level of required return to be applied to that capital (in relation to choice (iv)).
FFT hüpoteetiliste regulatiivsete omavahendite kasutamine kasumi taseme näitajana
As regards the amount of capital to be remunerated, the tax advisor selects parameters for the risk weighting and the minimum capital requirement to estimate FFT's hypothetical regulatory capital.
Komisjon ei leia, et regulatiivsed omavahendid, mida maksunõustaja kasutas tehingupõhise tootluse meetodi abil FFT täidetavate ülesannete eest reaalturuväärtuse põhimõttele vastava hüvitise suuruse kindlaksmääramisel, oleks kasumi suuruse hindamiseks asjakohane näitaja.