natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Since such passive management functions do not require active day-to-day management and liquidity management is not a core activity of ASI and AOE, the Commission accepts that the interest income of ASI and AOE derived from that passive management function is allocated to the head offices for tax purposes.
Nagu kõnealuses põhjenduses täiendavalt selgitatud, kohaldati „väiksema määraga maksustatava tulu“ mahaarvamist, mis vähendas nende äriühingute tegelikku maksukohustust Iirimaal, alles pärast mõlema äriühingu kogutulu pealt teoreetilise äriühingu tulumaksu kohustuse arvutamist, kohaldades tegevustulu 12,5 % maksumäära.
By contrast, ASI's and AOE's head offices should not have been allocated any actively managed IP, such as the Apple IP licences which ASI and AOE have the right to exploit under the CSA, contrary to the unsubstantiated assumption validated by the contested tax rulings.
See asjaolu kinnitab, et Apple pidas kõnealust tulu tegevustuluks, mitte litsentsitasudest saadud tuluks [241].
In certain years, no physical board meetings took place: only written resolutions were adopted by the board, which limits the board's decision-making process and the head offices' capacity to take active management decisions.
Kuna äriühingutel ASI ja AOE puudub väljaspool nende Iirimaa filiaale igasugune füüsiline kohalolek või majandustegevus, [242] tuleb ASI tegevust seoses Apple'i toodete hankimise, müügi ja turustamisega väljaspool Ameerikat ning AOE tegevust seoses arvutitoodete tootmisega väljaspool Ameerikat asuvate turgude jaoks pidada tegevuseks, mida viivad täies mahus läbi nende Iirimaa filiaalid.
On the infrequent occasions that the board did discuss the distribution or manufacturing business of ASI, the minutes systematically refer to prior discussions between ASI and other parties [225].
ASI ja AOE tulu esindab seega aktiivset tegevustulu, mis tuleneb filiaali tegevusest, sest puuduvad töötajad, kes saaksid luua sellist tulu väljaspool Iirimaad [243].
In sum, had Irish Revenue properly confirmed whether the Apple IP licences held by ASI and AOE should be allocated outside of Ireland before endorsing profit allocation methods premised on that assumption, it should have concluded that the head offices of ASI and AOE did not control or manage, nor were they in a position to control or manage, the Apple IP licences in such a manner as to derive the type of income recorded by those companies.
Teisisõnu ei oleks tohtinud sellist tulu nagu ASI ja AOE kirjendatud tegevustulu jaotada tervenisti ega osaliselt nende äriühingute peakontoritele.
Consequently, ASI's and AOE's Irish branches, if they were separate and independent companies engaged in the same or similar activities under the same or similar conditions and taking into account the assets used, the functions performed and the risks assumed by those companies through their branches and through their respective head offices, would not have accepted a profit allocation method based on that assumption, which results in all the profit of ASI and AOE beyond a limited mark-up on a reduced cost base being allocated to the head offices instead of to those branches.
Isegi kui mingit osa sellest tulust võiks pidada intellektuaalomandist saadavaks tuluks, jättis Iirimaa maksuhaldur igal juhul uurimata, millise osa sellest peakontoritele üle kantud jääkkasumist võiks omistada litsentsitasu liiki tulule.
As demonstrated in recitals 281 to 292, the information needed to establish that conclusion was available to Irish Revenue or could have been made available to it during the period that the contested tax rulings were in force [226].
Äriühingu Apple Inc. panus teadus- ja arendustegevusse ning äriühingutele ASI ja AOE kuuluvate Apple'i intellektuaalomandilitsentside haldamisse ei mõjuta kasumi jaotamist ASIs ja AOEs
That information establishes in a reliable and direct manner that the Apple IP licences held by ASI and AOE should not have been allocated to the head offices for tax purposes.
Nagu on selgitatud põhjenduses 275, väidavad Iirimaa ja Apple ka, et teadus- ja arendustegevus ning Apple'i intellektuaalomandi haldamine on tsentraliseeritud ülesanded, mida juhivad Apple'i peakontorid USAs.
Contrary to the claims made by Ireland [227], that information should not have been disregarded when allocating profits to the Irish branches, since that information allows Irish Revenue to conclude in a more reliable manner on whether the profit allocation methods proposed by Apple result in a reliable approximation of a market-based outcome in line with the arm's length principle, than by solely relying on information on the activities of the Irish branches.
Iirimaa ja Apple'i väitel on ASI ja AOE kasumlikkuse tõukejõuks äriühingute Apple Inc. töötajate panus, nii et Iirimaa maksuhalduril oli õigus jätta sellest panusest tulenev kasum ASI ja AOE Iirimaa filiaalide maksustatavast kasumist välja [244].
In any event, even accepting Ireland's argument that the profit allocation exercise need only be conducted taking into account the assets used, functions performed and risks assumed by the Irish branches, which the Commission contests, Irish Revenue should at the very least have confirmed that the Apple IP licences should not be allocated to the Irish branches of ASI and AOE for tax purposes.
Põhjendustes 310–318 esitatud põhjustel ei nõustu komisjon selle arutluskäiguga.
As explained in recitals 296 to 304, seeing as those branches were presented to Irish Revenue as ensuring functions for which the use of those licences was crucial and seeing as indications existed that those branches did in fact ensure IP-related functions that were crucial in building brand awareness and brand recognition in the EMEIA region, it was incumbent on Irish Revenue to at least have confirmed that the Apple IP licences should not be allocated, fully or in part, to the Irish branches before endorsing profit allocation methods based on the unsubstantiated assumption that the Apple IP licences should be allocated outside of Ireland.
ASI, AOE ja Apple Inc. on küll sama kontserni osad, kuid nad on kolm eraldiseisvat juriidilist isikut, nii et kõigi nende üksuste vaheliste kontsernisiseste tehingute suhtes kohaldatakse siirdehindade kokkuleppeid [245].
As regards ASI, its Irish branch was presented to Irish Revenue as executing procurement, sales and distribution activities associated with the sale of Apple products to related parties and third-party customers across the EMEIA and APAC regions [228].
Näiteks on ASI ja AOE poolt äriühingule Apple Inc.
Since that branch was authorised to distribute Apple branded products, its activities necessitated access to the Apple brand, which was granted to ASI as a whole in the form of the Apple IP licences.
Apple'i intellektuaalomandi arendamise eest makstav tasu sätestatud kulude jagamise kokkuleppes, [246] kuid turundusteenuste eest makstav tasu on sätestatud turundusteenuste kokkuleppes [247].
Consequently, even if Irish Revenue did not consider that the Apple IP licences should be allocated to ASI's Irish branch for tax purposes, it should have at the very least analysed how that branch's access to the Apple IP, which it needed to perform its functions, was ensured and set up within the company.
Vaidlustatud eelotsused ei hõlma siiski neid või muid kontsernisiseseid tehinguid, mida ühelt poolt ASI ja AOE ja teiselt poolt Apple Inc. võisid sõlmida.
There is no evidence that such an analysis was ever conducted.
Teisisõnu ei käsitle vaidlustatud eelotsused küsimust, kas kulude jagamise kokkulepe või turundusteenuste kokkulepe tehti turutingimustel, vaid neis võetakse kõnealuste kokkulepete tingimused pigem teadmiseks, mis tähendab, et nende eelotsustega ei kinnitata ühtegi kõnealuse kolme üksuse vahelist siirdehindade kokkulepet seoses näiteks teadus- ja arendustegevuse, Apple'i intellektuaalomandi haldamise või turundusteenustega.
Had such an analysis been conducted, it is apparent that ASI's Irish branch, in its capacity of executing procurement, sales and distribution activities associated with the sale of Apple products, ensures a number of functions crucial for the development and maintenance of the Apple brand on the local market and for ensuring customer loyalty to that brand in that market [229].
Vaidlustatud eelotsused käsitlevad üksnes ASI ja AOE kasumi jaotamist asjaomastele Iirimaa filiaalidele.
For instance, ASI's Irish branch incurred local marketing costs directly with third-party marketing service providers in relation to localisation and execution of global marketing strategies.
Kooskõlas kulude jagamise kokkuleppe tingimustega maksavad ASI ja AOE [248] äriühingule Apple Inc. tasu teadus- ja arendustegevuse eest, mille Apple Inc. (või teised kontserni äriühingud) tagab seoses Apple'i intellektuaalomandiga.
Adapting the brand strategy to the local market was a key function for the development of the brand in the respective regions and the branch was allocated costs of worldwide and local advertising programs to execute that function [230].
Seetõttu määrab ühelt poolt ASI ja AOE ning teiselt poolt Apple Inc. vahel sõlmitud kulude jagamise kokkulepe kindlaks iga osapoole kulude ja tulude osa Apple'i intellektuaalomandi arendamises.
ASI's Irish branch was also responsible for gathering and analysing regional data to estimate the expected demand forecast for Apple products [231], which function appears indispensable for the exploitation of the Apple IP in the EMEIA region.
Kulude jagamise kokkuleppe kohaselt jaotatakse Apple'i toodete teadus- ja arendustegevuse kulud äriühingute Apple Inc., ASI ja AOE vahel asjaomastel territooriumil müüdud toodete protsendi alusel [249].
ASI's Irish branch was also fully responsible for operating the AppleCare customer support service, which provides aftersales support and repair services for the entire EMEIA region.
ASI raamatupidamisaruannete kohaselt on tema tegevuskulude ainus suur komponent „teadus- ja arendustegevus“ [250].
That function directly reflects on the brand name, with the objective to ensure customer satisfaction, and includes the responsibility for warranty and repair programs [232].
Näiteks 2013. ja 2014. aastal maksis ASI Apple'i intellektuaalomandi arendamise eest vastavalt [2,0–2,5] miljardit USA dollarit ja [4,0–4,5] miljardit USA dollarit [251].
Accordingly, large risks related to the performance of the products and the technology were borne by ASI's Irish branch.
Aastatel 2010–2014 rahastasid ASI ja AOE koos üle poole Apple'i intellektuaalomandi teadus- ja arendustegevuse kuludest, samal ajal kui Apple Inc. rahastas alla poole nendest kuludest.
Finally, [50-60] of ASI's [300-400] FTEs, all of which were located in Ireland, were categorised by Apple in 2014 as R & D personnel [233].
Teisisõnu maksavad ASI ja AOE äriühingule Apple Inc. kulude jagamise kokkuleppe kaudu tasu Apple'i intellektuaalomandi arendamise eest, mille kulu vähendab ASI ja AOE üldist kasumlikkust.
As regards AOE, its Irish branch was presented to Irish Revenue as being responsible for the manufacturing and assembly of a specialised range of computer products for the EMEIA region.
Teisisõnu on Apple seega otsustanud ja rakendanud, kuidas hinnata ühelt poolt Apple Inc. tegevust ja teiselt poolt ASI ja AOE tegevust seoses Apple'i intellektuaalomandiga ning nende panust selle intellektuaalomandi väärtusesse.
In that capacity, AOE's Irish branch developed Apple-specific processes and manufacturing expertise and ensured quality assurance and quality control functions [234], which are needed to preserve the value of the brand [235].
See on kulude jagamise kokkuleppe tulemus, kus iga äriühing osaleb Apple'i intellektuaalomandi arendamisel tekkivates üldkuludes jaotuskriteeriumide alusel, mille Apple on ainuisikuliselt kindlaks määranud.
Moreover, when Apple presented the illustrative account filling format of AOE's Irish branch to Irish Revenue for the purposes of obtaining the 1991 ruling, it allocated the costs associated with the CSA to that branch and not to its head office [236].
Valitud kriteeriumi kohaselt omistati Apple'i intellektuaalomandi kulu proportsionaalselt iga äriühingu käibega, mille tulemusena kandsid ASI ja AOE enamiku teadus- ja arendustegevuse kuludest.
While Irish Revenue does not appear to have examined the terms of the CSA when it issued the contested tax rulings, the fact that the costs of the CSA were allocated to AOE's Irish branch by Apple itself should have made Irish Revenue question the unsubstantiated assumption underlying the profit allocation methods ultimately endorsed by it that the Apple IP licences should be allocated outside of Ireland.
Tasu äriühingu Apple Inc. teostatud teadus- ja arendustegevuse eest seoses Apple'i intellektuaalomandiga on seega juba arvesse võetud, jaotades arenduskulud kulude jagamise kokkuleppe iga osapoole asjaomase müügi alusel, sest Apple valis selle aluse Apple'i intellektuaalomandi osa jaotamiseks igale äriühingule.
Similarly, Apple itself proposed that its Irish branch should receive a return for the Apple IP in the 2007 ruling request.
Seega on iga äriühingu – Apple Inc., ASI ja AOE – kasum müügi ja kõigi asjaomaste kulude, sealhulgas kulude jagamise kokkuleppes Apple'i intellektuaalomandi arendamise eest määratud iga-aastaste maksete vahe.
Under the 2007 ruling, [1-5] % of branch turnover was allocated to AOE's Irish branch under the denomination ‘IP return’ [237].
Viidates USAs seoses teadus- ja arendustegevuse ja Apple'i intellektuaalomandi haldamisega toimuvale tegevusele, näivad Iirimaa ja Apple seega viitavat äriühingu Apple Inc. poolt ASI ja AOE kasuks tehtud mittetasustatud panuse olemasolule, mis läheb kaugemale Apple Inc. tasustatud tegevusest kulude jagamise kokkuleppe ning turundusteenuste kokkuleppe raames, sest ASI ja AOE raamatupidamisaruannetes puuduvad igasugused muud viited äriühingu Apple Inc. täiendava tasustamise kohta seoses teadus- ja arendustegevuse ning Apple'i intellektuaalomandi haldamisega.
That proposal should have provided Irish Revenue with an indication that AOE's Irish branch was involved in IP development or some form of management or control of the Apple IP licences.
Sellise mittetasustatud panuse olemasolu ei mõjuta aga kasumi jaotamist ASIs ja AOEs.
Against this background, it was incumbent on Irish Revenue, when presented with the profit allocation methods proposed by Apple to determine ASI's and AOE's taxable profit in Ireland, to confirm at the very least that those companies' Irish branches should not be allocated the Apple IP licences, rather than to accept the unsubstantiated assumption that those licences should be allocated outside of Ireland.
Nagu on selgitatud põhjenduses 271, ei ole ühelt poolt ASI ja AOE peakontorid ning teiselt poolt nende Iirimaa filiaalid eraldi juriidilised isikud.
Given the Irish branches involvement in the Apple IP, Irish Revenue should not have disregarded any profits derived from the use of the Apple IP licences and the costs incurred under the CSA for the Irish branches.
Nad on pigem Apple'i intellektuaalomandilitsentsi omava juriidilise isiku osad ja just sellele isikule on Apple Inc. need väidetavad mittetasustatud panused tervikuna teinud.
In light of all the foregoing reasons, the Commission concludes that the allocation of the Apple IP licences outside of Ireland was not an allocation that could have been agreed to in an arm's length context between two unaffiliated companies.
Kuigi tasu, mida ASI ja AOE maksid äriühingule Apple Inc. viimase panuse eest seoses teadus- ja arendustegevuse ning Apple'i intellektuaalomandi haldamisega, võib mõjutada ja tegelikult mõjutabki ASI ja AOE üldist kasumlikkust, ei mõjuta see selle kasumi järgnevat jaotamist ASIs ja AOEs ega seega ka kasumi jaotamist ASI ja AOE Iirimaa filiaalidele.
Given the lack of functions performed by the head offices and/or the functions performed by the Irish branches, the Apple IP licences for the procurement, manufacturing, sales and distribution of Apple products outside of the Americas should have been allocated to the Irish branches for tax purposes.
Teisisõnu, kuigi sellised täiendavad panused võivad mõjutada ASI ja AOE üldist kasumlikkust, siis kui neid oleks tõesti tehtud ja kui nende eest oleks tegelikult tasustatud, mida aga ei tehtud, ei mõjutaks need järgnevat kasumi jaotamist ASIs ja AOEs.
In light of that conclusion, Ireland's claim that, since the Apple IP that generates the profits recorded by ASI and AOE is located outside of Ireland, the profits derived from that IP should be subtracted from the taxable profits in Ireland in line with the territoriality principle should also be rejected [238].
Seda seetõttu, et ASI ja AOE poolt nende panuste eest makstud kulusid kannaksid need äriühingud tervikuna (mitte ainult peakontorid või Iirimaa filiaalid) ja seega vähendaksid need kulud äriühingute kogukasumit.
In any event, the income recorded by ASI and AOE is not income from royalties, but income from sales for which no IP remuneration has been singled out in the companies' financial statements.
Kõigepealt arvatakse need kulud ASI ja AOE kõnealusest kasumist maha ja alles seejärel tuleks ülejäänud kasum jaotada maksustamise eesmärgil peakontorite ja nende Iirimaa filiaalide vahel.
Indeed, the income recorded by ASI and AOE is indicated as trading income in those companies' financial statements [239] and has been declared as such to Irish Revenue (with the deduction of interest income).
Samamoodi mõjutab asjaolu, et Apple Inc. tagab kulude jagamise kokkuleppe ja turundusteenuste kokkuleppe kohaselt teadus- ja arendustegevuse ning disainilahenduste turunduskampaaniad ASI ja AOE kasuks, ASI ja AOE üldist kasumlikkust, kuid ei puutu asjasse ASI ja AOE kirjendatud kasumi jaotamisel nende peakontorite ja asjaomaste filiaalide vahel.
Moreover, as explained in recital 278, the entire income of the two companies (with the exception of the interest income) was reported in the annual accounts of ASI and AOE from 2004 until 2008 as taxable at 12,5 %, which would correspond, according to the classification provided by Ireland, to trading income [240].
Iirimaa väide, et Apple'i toodete loodav väärtus võib eeldada kalleid investeeringuid, võib olla täiesti õige, [252] kuid ASI ja AOE panus nendesse investeeringutesse on hõlmatud kulude jagamise kokkuleppe ja turundusteenuste kokkuleppega, mis ei saa mõjutada kasumi jaotamist nendes äriühingutes.
As further explained in that recital, only once a theoretical corporation tax liability had been calculated for the entire income of both companies by applying the 12,5 % rate for trading income, was a deduction for ‘income taxed at lower rates’ applied, reducing the effective tax liability of those companies in Ireland.
Kuna ASI ja AOE raamatupidamisaruannetes puudub igasugune viide sellele, et äriühingule Apple Inc. on makstud tasu teadus- ja arendustegevuse ning Apple'i intellektuaalomandi haldamise eest väljaspool kulude jagamise kokkulepet, [253] on väide, et äriühingu Apple Inc. panus teadus- ja arendustegevusse ning Apple'i intellektuaalomandi haldamisse mõjutab kasumi jaotamist ASIs ja AOEs, igal juhul alusetu.
This fact confirms that the income in question was considered by Apple to constitute trading income and not income from royalties [241].
Paistab, et Iirimaa ja Apple esitavad pelgalt äriühingu Apple Inc. abstraktse nõude muude juriidiliste isikute (ASI ja AOE) kasumile, mis läheb kaugemale kulude jagamise kokkuleppe või turundusteenuste kokkuleppe kohasest lepingulisest korrast ja jääb kasumi jaotamise alt välja.
Since neither ASI nor AOE have any physical presence or economic activity outside their Irish branches [242], the activity consisting of the procurement, sales and distribution of Apple products outside of the Americas performed by ASI and the activity consisting of the manufacturing of computer products for the markets outside of the Americas performed by AOE must be considered to be entirely carried out by their respective Irish branches.
Iirimaa väidab, et ASI ja AOE tehtud maksed äriühingu Apple Inc. panuse eest on omistatavad peakontoritele, ja osutab sellega seoses kulude jagamise kokkuleppe ja turundusteenuste kokkuleppe kohastele maksetele [254].
The income of ASI and AOE therefore represents active trading income arising from the branch activity, since there are no employees who could generate such income outside of Ireland [243].
Isegi kui eeldada, et kulude jagamise kokkuleppe ja turundusteenuste kokkuleppe kohased maksed võivad mõjutada kasumi jaotamist ASIs ja AOEs, millega komisjon nõus ei ole, [255] ei ole ühtki ilmset põhjust jaotada need maksed pigem peakontoritele kui Iirimaa filiaalidele.
In other words, income, such as the trading income recorded by ASI and AOE, should therefore not have been allocated to those companies' head offices either in full or in part.
Kulude jagamise kokkuleppe ja turundusteenuste kokkuleppe tingimustes ei eristata peakontoreid ja Iirimaa filiaale.
However, even if any of that income could be considered to constitute IP income, Irish Revenue in any event failed to examine which proportion of the resulting residual profit transferred to the head offices, if any, could be attributed to a royalty-type income.
See on ootuspärane, sest lepingulisest seisukohast on nad sama juriidilise isiku osad.
Contributions by Apple Inc. in R & D and the management of the Apple IP licences held by ASI and AOE cannot influence the allocation of profits within ASI and AOE
Mis puutub aga nendes kokkulepetes märgitud ASI ja AOE aadressi, siis on see järjepidevalt Iirimaa filiaalide aadress [256].
As explained in recital 275, Ireland and Apple also argue that R & D and the management of the Apple IP is centred in and directed from Apple's headquarters in the US.
Isegi kui nõustuda, et äriühingu Apple Inc. poolt ASI ja AOE kasuks tehtud panus võib mõjutada kasumi jaotamist ASIs ja AOEs, puudub igasugune viide sellele, et Apple Inc. ei oleks peakontorite puudumisel teinud sama panust Iirimaa filiaalide kasuks, arvestades eelkõige seda, et peakontorid ei näi sellest panusest mingit kasu saavat, võttes arvesse asjaolu, et neid ei ole füüsiliselt olemas ja neil puuduvad töötajad.
According to Ireland and Apple, it is those contributions by Apple Inc. employees that drive ASI's and AOE's profitability, so that Irish Revenue was right to exclude profit deriving from those contributions in the taxable profit of ASI's and AOE's Irish branches [244].
Põhjendustes 281–290 on kindlaks tehtud, et peakontorid ei osale ega saa osaleda oma juhatuse koosolekute vormis toimunud piiratud tegevuse kaudu teadus- ja arendustegevuses.
The Commission does not agree with that line of reasoning for the reasons set out in recitals 310 to 318.
See oleks tõepoolest võimatu, sest peakontoritel puuduvad füüsiline kohalolek ja töötajad.
While ASI, AOE and Apple Inc. form part of the same corporate group, they are three distinct legal entities, so any intra-group transactions between those entities are subject to transfer pricing arrangements [245].
Nagu on märgitud põhjendustes 295–304, näib seevastu, et Iirimaa filiaalid osalevad tegevuses, mis toetab otseselt või kaudselt Apple'i intellektuaalomandit, ning Apple on neid varem sellisena ka kohelnud.
For instance, the remuneration of Apple Inc. by ASI and AOE for the development of the Apple IP has been laid down in the CSA [246], while the remuneration of Apple Inc. by ASI and AOE for marketing services has been laid down in the Marketing Service Agreement [247].
Isegi kui nõustuda, et Apple Inc. andis mittetasustatud panuse ASI ja AOE kasuks ning see mittetasustatud panus võis mõjutada kasumi jaotamist ASIs ja AOEs, oleks kõnealune panus tulnud seega omistada Iirimaa filiaalidele.
The contested tax rulings do not, however, cover those or any other intra-group transactions that ASI and AOE, on the one hand, and Apple Inc., on the other, may have entered into.
Iirimaa ja Apple väidavad veel, et ASI ja AOE riski võetakse ja piiratakse kontserni poliitika kaudu, mis töötatakse välja USAs.