natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
See TEAC resolution of 26 June 2012 R.G: 3637/2010 and 1439/2011.
Vidjeti rezoluciju TAEC-a od 26. lipnja 2012., R.G: 3637/2010 i 1439/2011.
According to the TEAC Articles 23 and 24 Royal Decree 1815/1991.
Prema TEAC-u, članak 23. i 24. Kraljevskog dekreta 1815/1991.
The Commission refers to a simulation of a consolidation exercise, given that one of the requirements of Article 21 TRLIS is the acquisition of at least 5 % shareholding.
Komisija upućuje na simulaciju postupka konsolidacije, s obzirom na to da je jedan od zahtjeva iz članka 21. TRLIS-a stjecanje najmanje 5 % vlasničkih udjela.
This percentage does not imply consolidation with the acquiring company.
Navedeni postotak ne podrazumijeva konsolidaciju s trgovačkim društvom stjecateljem.
See TEAC resolution R.G.
Vidjeti rezoluciju TAEC-a R.G.
2842-09 of 3 November 2011.
2842-09 od 3. studenoga 2011.
See TEAC resolution of 17 February 2011; R.G.
Vidjeti rezoluciju TAEC-a od 17. veljače 2011., R.G.
See judgement of the Spanish Supreme Court of 24 June 2013; RJ/2013/5335.
Vidjeti presudu španjolskog Vrhovnog suda od 24. lipnja 2013., RJ/2013/5335.
See letter of 4 June 2007 sent by the Spain in reply to a request for information of 26 March 2007.
Vidjeti dopis od 4. lipnja 2007. kojim je Španjolska odgovorila na zahtjev za informacije od 26. ožujka 2007.
See Judgement C-537/08P of 16 December 2010, Kahla Thüringen Porzellan GmbH v Commission, p. 44.
Vidjeti presudu C-537/08P od 16. prosinca 2010., Kahla Thüringen Porzellan GmbH protiv Komisije, t. 44.
COMP M.4517, paragraph 42.
COMP M.4517, stavak 42.
The Spanish authorities communicated to the Commission that Article 12(5) TRLIS was applied only to direct acquisitions by letter of 4 June 2007.
Španjolska tijela obavijestila su Komisiju dopisom od 4. lipnja 2007. da se članak 12. stavak 5. TRLIS-a primjenjuje samo na izravna stjecanja.
Moreover, it is worth noting that the replies to the written parliamentary questions did not make any explicit differentiation between direct and indirect acquisitions.
Nadalje, valja napomenuti da izravna i neizravna stjecanja nisu izrijekom spomenuta u odgovorima na pisana parlamentarna pitanja.
Joined Cases 66/79, 127/79 and 128/79, Salumi and others, [1980] ECR-1237, p. 14; Case C-14/01 Niemann [2003] ECR I-2279, p. 49.
Spojeni predmeti 66/79, 127/79 i 128/79, Salumi and others, (1980.) ECR-1237, t. 14.; predmet C-14/01 Niemann (2003.) ECR I-2279, t. 49.
Letter of 4 December 2012.
Dopis od 4. prosinca 2012.
See case C-537/08 P, Kahla Thüringen Porzellan GmbH, paragraphs 40 and following.
Vidjeti predmet C-537/08 P, Kahla Thüringen Porzellan GmbH, t. 40. i sljedeća.
Judgement of the Court of Justice of 22.6.2006; case C-182/03 and C-217/03, Forum 187 ASBL [2006] ECR I-5479, par. 147.
Presuda Suda od 22. lipnja 2006.; predmet C-182/03 i C-217/03, Forum 187 ASBL (2006.) ECR I-5479, t. 147.
Judgement of the Court of Justice of 22.6.2006; case C-182/03 and C-217/03, Forum 187 ASBL [2006] ECR I-5479, par. 159.
Presude Suda od 22. lipnja 2006.; predmet C-182/03 i C-217/03, Forum 187 ASBL (2006.) ECR I-5479, t. 159.
Council Regulation (EC) No 994/98 of 7 May 1998 on the application of Articles 92 and 93 of the Treaty establishing the European Community to certain categories of horizontal State aid (OJ L 142, 14.5.1998, p. 1).
Uredba Vijeća (EZ) br. 994/98 od 7. svibnja 1998. o primjeni članaka 107. i 108. Ugovora o funkcioniranju Europske unije na određene kategorije horizontalnih državnih potpora (SL L 142, 14.5.1998., str. 1.).
The Spanish authorities provided the requested information on 5 December 2012.
Španjolska tijela dostavila su tražene informacije 5. prosinca 2012.
On 12 December 2012 a technical meeting took place between the Commission and the Spanish authorities.
Tehnički sastanak Komisije i španjolskih tijela održan je 12. prosinca 2012.
Its paragraph 5 entered into force on 1 January 2002.
Njegov stavak 5. stupio je na snagu 1. siječnja 2002.
It was introduced in the Spanish Corporate Tax Law 43/1995 of 27 December by Article 2(5) of Law 24/2001 of 27 December [11].
U španjolski zakon o porezu na dobit 43/1995 od 27. prosinca uveden je člankom 2. stavkom 5. zakona 24/2001 od 27. prosinca [11].
The Spanish authorities provided [15] a copy of administrative interpretations 1490-02 of 4 October 2002 and V0391-05 of 10 March 2005 [16].
Španjolska tijela dostavila su [15] primjerak upravnih tumačenja 1490-02 od 4. listopada 2002. i V0391-05 od 10. ožujka 2005. [16].
These administrative interpretations confirm that since the adoption of Article 12(5) TRLIS the DGT explicitly excluded indirect acquisitions of shareholdings that result from the direct acquisition of shareholdings of a holding from the application of Article 12(5) TRLIS.
Navedenim upravnim tumačenjima potvrđeno je da je od donošenja članka 12. stavka 5. TRLIS-a DGT iz njegove primjene izričito isključio neizravna stjecanja vlasničkih udjela proizišla iz izravnih stjecanja vlasničkih udjela holdinga.
They also argue that the TEAC's doctrine is not part of the legal order.
One tvrde i da TEAC-ova doktrina nije dijelom pravnog poretka.
Although its doctrine binds the tax administration, it is subject to the control of subsequent court instances.
Iako je njegova doktrina obvezujuća za poreznu upravu, ona podliježe nadzoru sudskih instanci.
The tax administration in charge of tax enforcement should apply the criteria contained in the tax interpretations as long as there is an identity of facts and circumstances between the incumbent and the addressee of the administrative tax interpretation.
Porezna uprava nadležna je za naplatu poreza i treba primjenjivati kriterije sadržane u poreznim tumačenjima pod uvjetom da su kod obveznika i onoga kome je upućeno upravno porezno tumačenje prisutni isto činjenično stanje i okolnosti.
Moreover, according to some of the interested third parties, even before the DGT consulta and the TEAC resolution of 2012, the administrative interpretation was progressively modified by a resolution of the TEAC 1 of June 2010 and a judgment of the Audiencia Nacional of 13 October 2011.
Nadalje, prema nekim zainteresiranim trećim stranama, upravno tumačenje postupno je modificirano rezolucijom TEAC-a od 1. lipnja 2010. i presudom suda Audiencia Nacional od 13. listopada 2011. i prije upravnog tumačenja DGT-a i rezolucije TEAC-a iz 2012.
The issue analysed in the TEAC resolution and the Audiencia Nacional judgement related to the application of Article 12(5) TRLIS to intra-group acquisition of shareholdings.
Pitanje analizirano u rezoluciji TEAC-a i presudi suda Audiencia Nacional odnosilo se na primjenu članka 12. stavka 5. TRLIS-a na stjecanje vlasničkih udjela unutar grupe.
The Spanish authorities also state that the requests made by the companies about the deduction of financial goodwill for indirect acquisitions of shareholdings were not systematically denied, as indicated by the Commission in the Opening decision of 2013.
Španjolska tijela navode i da zahtjevi trgovačkih društava za primjenu olakšice za financijski goodwill pri neizravnim stjecanjima vlasničkih udjela nisu sustavno odbijani, kako je navedeno u odluci Komisije o pokretanju službenog istražnog postupka iz 2013.
There was not a systematic denial because the tax collection system does not require the incumbent to request the application of Article 12(5) TRLIS.
Nije bilo sustavnog odbijanja jer se u okviru sustava naplate poreza od obveznika ne zahtijeva primjena članka 12. stavka 5. TRLIS-a.
The Spanish authorities allege that the tax administration and the DGT complied with the principle of consistent interpretation with EU Law, the principle of direct effect and primacy of EU Law when adopting the administrative interpretation V0608-12 of 21 March and the TEAC resolution of 26 June 2012.
Španjolska tijela navode da su porezna uprava i DGT pri donošenju upravnog tumačenja V0608-12 od 21. ožujka i odluke TEAC-a od 26. lipnja 2012. poštovali načelo dosljednog tumačenja prava EU-a, načelo izravnog učinka i načelo nadređenosti prava EU-a.
Indeed, national authorities, judges or the administration should always apply national law in conformity with EU Law and are bound by the principle of loyal cooperation laid down in Article 4 of the TFEU.
Nacionalna tijela, suci ili uprava moraju uvijek primjenjivati nacionalno pravo u skladu s pravom EU-a i obvezani su načelom iskrene suradnje utvrđenim u članku 4. UFEU-a.
Not only the Commission refers repeatedly to direct and indirect acquisitions, but also it does not refer to the administrative interpretation of Article 12(5) TRLIS in the wording of the two decisions.
Zainteresirane treće strane smatraju da bi oprezan i razborit poduzetnik iz teksta odluka mogao zaključiti da su neizravna stjecanja obuhvaćena područjem primjene članka 12. stavka 5.
This practice is also evidenced by the consistent administrative interpretations of the DGT and the TEAC in place since 2002 until 2012.
Navedena je praksa dokazana i dosljednim upravnim tumačenjima DGT-a i TEAC-a na snazi od 2002. sve do 2012. Bez obzira na tekst relevantnih odredaba TRLIS-a, u trenutku donošenja prve i druge odluke DGT i TEAC dosljedno su i sustavno primjenjivali članak 12. stavak 5. TRLIS-a samo na izravna stjecanja vlasničkih udjela u trgovačkim društvima koja posluju.
Irrespective of the wording of the relevant provisions of the TRLIS, at the moment of the adoption of the First and Second Decisions, the DGT and the TEAC were consistently systematically applying Article 12(5) TRLIS only to direct shareholding acquisitions of operating companies.
Takvo tumačenje postoji od 1. siječnja 2002., kada je članak 12. stavak 5.
The Spanish authorities and some of the interested third parties claim that the administrative interpretation was progressively modified by a resolution of the TEAC of June 2010 and a judgement of the Audiencia Nacional of 13 October 2011 [38], which was subsequently upheld by the Spanish Supreme Court in a judgement of 24 June 2013 [39].
Španjolska tijela i neke zainteresirane treće strane tvrde da je upravno tumačenje postupno izmijenjeno rezolucijom TEAC-a iz lipnja 2010. te presudom suda Audiencia Nacional od 13. listopada 2011. [38], što je naknadno potvrdio i španjolski Vrhovni sud presudom od 24. lipnja 2013. [39].
The Commission considers that the abovementioned judgements do not evidence a modification in the fiscal treatment of indirect acquisitions of shareholdings in the context of Article 12(5) TRLIS.
Komisija smatra da prethodno navedene presude nisu dokaz izmjene poreznog postupka u pogledu neizravnih stjecanja u kontekstu članka 12. stavka 5. TRLIS-a.
It is after this simulation of a consolidation process that the difference between the purchase price of the shareholding and its book value can be attributed to the assets and rights of the non-resident holding.
Nakon simulacije postupka konsolidacije moguće je razliku između kupovne cijene vlasničkog udjela i njegove knjigovodstvene vrijednosti pripisati imovini i pravima nerezidentnog holdinga.
Although the acquisitions to which reference is made in the replies to the written parliamentary questions or the press release of the opening decision of 2007 might have involved indirect acquisitions, the Commission could not have known — at least for the vast majority of the operations — which was the corporate structure of the companies that were being acquired, that is, whether the acquired companies were operating companies or holding companies.
Iako su u stjecanja na koja se upućuje u odgovorima na pisana parlamentarna pitanja ili priopćenju za tisak o odluci o pokretanju službenog istražnog postupka iz 2007. mogla biti uključena i neizravna stjecanja, Komisija u većini operacija nije mogla biti upoznata s korporativnom strukturom stečenih trgovačkih društava, odnosno nije mogla znati je li riječ o stjecanju trgovačkih društava koja posluju ili holding društava.
This is also confirmed by the existence of a consistent and relevant administrative practice, which remained in place until 2012.
To je potvrđeno i dosljednom i relevantnom upravnom praksom, koja je postojala sve do 2012.
In this respect, the Commission observes that, as outlined by the Court, the Commission analyses the regime as it is applied.
S tim u vezi, Komisija smatra, kako je opisao Sud, da Komisija analizira način primjene programa.
This difference might be due to two different reasons: (1) to the intrinsic value of the assets and rights of the company; or (2) to an overprice paid due to a greater than apparent expectation of obtaining higher revenues in the future.
Do razlike može doći iz dvaju različitih razloga: 1. stvarna dodana vrijednost imovine trgovačkog društva; ili 2. viša cijena plaćena zbog očekivanih većih prihoda u budućnosti. Potonja kategorija odgovara financijskom goodwillu.
The Commission is of the opinion that the undertakings that carried out indirect acquisitions cannot plead a legitimate expectation that the indirect shareholding acquisitions were covered by Article 12(5) TRLIS, given that these undertakings were well aware of the administrative practice of the tax administration and the TEAC that was in place until 2012.
Navedeni su poduzetnici znali da je porezni postupak o kojem je Komisija obaviještena (članak 12. stavak 5. TRLIS-a) tada proveden uz isključenje neizravnih stjecanja vlasničkih udjela koja su proizišla iz izravnih stjecanja holding društva iz njegova područja primjene.
These undertakings were aware that the tax scheme communicated to the Commission — Article 12(5) TRLIS — was implemented at that time excluding from its scope indirect shareholding acquisitions that result from a direct shareholding acquisition of a holding company.
Španjolska tijela navode da se postojanjem ograničavajućeg upravnog tumačenja ne umanjuju legitimna očekivanja poduzetnika koji su izvršili neizravna stjecanja vlasničkih udjela putem izravnih stjecanja vlasničkih udjela holdinga u pogledu valjanosti članka 12. stavka 5.
See Judgement C-537/08P of 16 December 2010, Kahla Thüringen Porzellan GmbH v Commission, p. 44; See also Judgement C-138/09 Todaro Nunziatina [2010] paragraph 31.
Vidjeti presudu C-537/08P od 16 prosinca 2010. u predmetu Kahla Thüringen Porzellan GmbH protiv Komisije, t. 44.; Vidjeti i presudu C-138/09 Todaro Nunziatina (2010.) t. 31.
SA 35550 (12/CP).
SA 35550 (12/CP)
First, the DGT and TEAC refer to Article 21(1)(c) TRLIS in order to argue that indirect acquisitions can also benefit from the deduction of Article 12(5) TRLIS. According to the DGT and the TEAC, the requirement of carrying out an economic activity can be met when the operating company is also in second or ulterior levels.
Prema DGT-u i TEAC-u, zahtjev u pogledu obavljanja gospodarske djelatnosti moguće je ispuniti ako je trgovačko društvo na drugoj ili ostalim razinama.
According to the Spanish authorities, the Commission is mistaken when stating in the Opening decision that ‘the new interpretation of the Finance Ministry was confirmed by a Resolution of the TEAC of 26 June 2012’. The DGT and TEAC are independent institutions: the DGT is part of the Administration and the TEAC has been qualified as a Court by the European Court of Justice [26].
Prema španjolskim tijelima, Komisija je pogriješila navodeći u odluci o pokretanju službenog istražnog postupka da je „novo tumačenje Ministarstva financija potvrđeno rezolucijom TAEC-a od 26. lipnja 2012.” DGT i TEAC neovisne su institucije: DGT je dio državne uprave, a Europski je sud ocijenio da je TEAC sud [26].
Therefore, it can be inferred from the Court judgement that since the legal provisio ns at issue — Article 12(5) TRLIS and Article 21(1)(a) TRLIS —, their modalities and limits have not been modified, the new interpretation cannot qualify as new aid.
Stoga se iz presude Suda može zaključiti da se novo tumačenje ne može smatrati novom državnom potporom jer se zakonske odredbe o kojima je riječ, tj. članak 12. stavak 5. TRLIS-a i članak 21. stavak 1. točka (a) TRLIS-a, nisu mijenjale, kao ni njihovi modaliteti i ograničenja.
Since they cannot trigger legal effects, they cannot have a retroactive effect. The interested third parties agree that there is not a retroactive application of the measure.
Drugo, brojni porezni obveznici zanemarili su kriterije sadržane u upravnom tumačenju i primijenili poreznu olakšicu za financijski goodwill sadržanu u članku 12. stavku 5.
Second, many tax payers disregarded the initial criteria contained in the administrative interpretation and applied the deduction of financial goodwill contained in Article 12(5) TRLIS to indirect acquisitions of shareholdings. B. LEGITIMATE EXPECTATIONS, LEGAL CERTAINTY AND PRINCIPLE OF ESTOPPEL
Prema španjolskim tijelima, u slučaju da Komisija utvrdi da novo upravno tumačenje koje se odnosi na članak 12. stavak 5.
Consequently, the Spanish authorities and interested third parties believe that the Commission was aware, based on the information provided to DG Competition services that the latter acquisition was an indirect acquisition of shareholding in a non-resident company that results from a previous acquisition of a holding company. Therefore, from the answers given to the MEP's, a prudent and diligent economic operator could not infer that they only referred to direct acquisitions of shareholdings.
Razlog je tome činjenica da je u članku 12. stavku 5.
According to the Spanish authorities, the existence of a previous restrictive administrative interpretation of Article 12(5) TRLIS does not affect the legitimate expectations of those beneficiaries that carried out indirect acquisitions of shareholdings. This is due to the fact that Article 12(5) TRLIS is a clear provision, contains a reference to the rules for consolidation of accounts and aims at fostering Spanish investment abroad as long as there is some influence in the activity of the acquired company and that it is engaged in economic activities.
TRLIS-a sadržana jasna odredba te upućivanje na pravila o konsolidaciji financijskih izvještaja te da se njime želi potaknuti španjolska ulaganja u inozemstvu, pod uvjetom da se time utječe na djelatnost stečenog društva te da ono obavlja gospodarske djelatnosti.
Therefore, the existence of a ‘self-assessment’ tax system does not contradict the Commission's view that the requests made by the companies relating to the deduction of financial goodwill in the context of indirect shareholding acquisitions were syst ematically denied.
Stoga postojanje sustava samostalnog utvrđivanja porezne obveze nije u proturječju sa stajalištem Komisije da su zahtjevi trgovačkih društava koji su se odnosili na primjenu olakšice za financijski goodwill u kontekstu neizravnih stjecanja vlasničkih udjela bili sustavno odbijani.
Indeed, Article 12(5) TRLIS is in itself a calculation method for the financial goodwill: it specifies which steps have to be followed in order to obtain the amount that constitutes financial goodwill. It is obvious that a modification or alteration in this calculation method, which entails a substantial modification of the tax advantage resulting from that provision, might have a direct impact on the legal effects of the provision.
TRLIS-a sadržana je metoda izračuna financijskog goodwilla: navedeni su koraci koje je potrebno pratiti kako bi se dobio iznos koji predstavlja financijski goodwill. Očito je da promjene ili izmjene ove metode izračuna, kojima su obuhvaćene znatne izmjene porezne olakšice koja proizlazi iz te odredbe, mogu izravno utjecati na pravne učinke odredbe.
Although there is no modification of the wording of the legal provision at stake — Article 12(5) TRLIS read in conjunction with Article 21 TRLIS — the Commission considers that the limits and modalities of the provision h ave been modified.
Iako tekst predmetne zakonske odredbe, članka 12. stavka 5. TRLIS-a u vezi s člankom 21. TRLIS-a, nije izmijenjen, Komisija smatra da su izmijenjena ograničenja i modaliteti odredbe.
Indeed, the First and Second Decision already concluded that Article 12(5) TRLIS constituted unlawful and incompatible aid. However, what is relevant in the present case is to determine whether the scope of application of the First and Second Decisions also covered indirect shareholdings that result from a previous acquisition of a holding in order to determine the existence of aid, its compatibility and the existence of legitimate expectations.
Međutim, u ovom je predmetu važno utvrditi jesu li područjem primjene prve i druge odluke obuhvaćeni i neizravni vlasnički udjeli koji proizlaze iz prethodnog stjecanja holdinga kako bi se utvrdilo postojanje potpore, njezina spojivost te postojanje legitimnih očekivanja.
This is also demonstrated by the calculation method used in the initial administrative interpretations, which is an intrinsic part of Article 12(5) TRLIS. According to this calculation method, the market value of the assets of the holding (shares of non-resident subsidiary operating companies) equates to the purchase price of the shareholding and therefore, no financial goodwill could arise.
U kontekstu upravnog postupka koji je doveo do donošenja odluke o službenom istražnom postupku iz 2007., španjolska tijela objasnila su [57] da se člankom 12. stavkom 5.
The fact that there is an offsetting between the purchase price and the market value of the holding's assets (shares) is due to an intrinsic characteristic of a holding company, namely that its assets are shares of other subsidiary operating companies. (167) The Spanish authorities explained [57], in the context of the administrative procedure that led to the opening decision of 2007, that Article 12(5) TRLIS only requires the acquisition of a 5 % shareholding in the equity of the non-resident company, a percentage of shareholding which does not imply consolidation neither with the non-resident company nor with subsequent subsidiary companies.
TRLIS-a zahtijeva samo stjecanje od 5 % vlasničkog udjela u kapitalu nerezidentnog društva te da taj postotak ne podrazumijeva konsolidaciju s nerezidentnim trgovačkim društvom ni s ostalim podređenim trgovačkim društvima.
The control of the depreciation can only be done through the Spanish resident company because the shareholdings, located at first level, are part of the assets of the Spanish resident company. It would be more difficult for the tax administration to control the financial goodwill arising in non-resident companies located at second or ulterior levels.
Poreznoj bi upravi bilo mnogo teže kontrolirati financijski goodwill koji nastaje u nerezidentnim trgovačkim društvima koja se nalaze na drugoj i ostalim razinama udjela u vlasništvu.
The Commission believes that the imprecise and unclear character of the provision led to a controversy in its interpretation. In fact, this controversy is evidenced in most of the consultas of the DGT and TEAC resolutions.
TRLIS-a mogla stvoriti legitimna očekivanja poduzetnika koji su izvršili neizravna stjecanja vlasničkih udjela.
The fact that the Spanish authorities were applying Article 12(5) TRLIS only to direct acquisitions is not contested neither by Spain nor by the interested third parties. As already indicated above, the Commission is therefore entitled to rely on the explanations provided by the Member State concerned and therefore it could legitimately assume that the regime was applied as the Member State had indicated.
Nadalje, Komisija smatra da iako komunikacija između španjolskih tijela i Komisije u kojoj je objašnjeno da se u praksi može odbiti samo financijski goodwill pri izravnim stjecanjima vlasničkih udjela u trgovačkim društvima koja posluju nije navedena u odlukama, njome nisu stvorena legitimna očekivanja korisnika potpore da su i neizravna stjecanja obuhvaćena člankom 12. stavkom 5.
Commission Implementing Decision (EU) 2015/315
Provedbena odluka Komisije (EU) 2015/315
concerning certain protective measures in relation to highly pathogenic avian influenza of subtype H5N8 in Germany
o određenim zaštitnim mjerama u vezi s visoko patogenom influencom ptica podtipa H5N8 u Njemačkoj
(notified under document C(2015) 1004)
(priopćeno pod brojem dokumenta C(2015) 1004)