natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
No provision of national law establishes any connection of any kind between the exemption from corporate tax and any public service tasks assigned to the ports [48].
Naime, niti jednom odredbom unutarnjeg prava ne uspostavlja se nikakva povezanost između oslobođenja od plaćanja poreza na dobit i mogućih zadaća javnih usluga povjerenih lukama [48].
Nor does national law guarantee that the amount of the compensation (i.e. the amount of corporate tax not paid) is limitedto the amount needed to cover all or part of the costs arising from the fulfilment of public service obligations.
Unutarnjim pravom jamči se samo ograničavanje iznosa naknade (tj. neplaćeniiznos poreza na dobit) na ono što je potrebno da bi se pokrili svi troškovi nastali obavljanjem javnih usluga ili njihov dio.
The corporate tax exemption, the amount of which is proportional to the profit made, is not subject to a maximum limit and may therefore lead to an advantage which is disproportionate to the additional cost resulting from the public service obligations.
Oslobođenje od poreza na dobit čiji je iznos razmjeran ostvarenoj dobiti nije ograničeno te stoga može dovesti do prednosti nerazmjerne troškovima nastalima obavljanjem javnih usluga.
Finally, the assertion by the GPM of Dunkirk that the cost of the public service tasks systematically exceeds the theoretical corporate tax charge is not demonstrated by any figures or any historical data; in the absence of a legal guarantee (also valid for the future) of absence of overcompensation, even if this assertion had been proved to be true for the past, that would not be sufficient to comply with the no overcompensation requirement.
Konačno, potvrda GPM Dunkerque prema kojoj troškovi obavljanja javnih usluga sustavno prelaze teoretski trošak poreza na dobit nije dokazana nikakvim podacima o prihodima ni prijašnjim podacima; zbog zakonskog jamstva (koje vrijedi i u budućnosti) o nepostojanju prekomjerne naknade, čak i ako je ta potvrda ranije potvrđena ne bi bilo dovoljna da se ispunjava uvjet neprekomjerne naknade.
To be considered State aid, a measure must be selective, in the sense that it favours certain undertakings or the production of certain goods within the meaning of Article 107(1) TFEU [49].
Da bi se smatrala državnom potporom, mjera mora biti selektivna, odnosno mora stavljati u povlašteni položaj određene poduzetnike ili proizvodnju određene robe u smislu članka 107. stavka 1.
Second, it is necessary to determine whether the measure in question derogates from the reference system by differentiating between economic operators which, in the light of the objective pursued by said tax regime, are in a comparable factual and legal situation.
Drugo, potrebno je odrediti odstupa li predmetna mjera od referentnog sustava u mjeri u kojoj uvodi razlike među operaterima koji se, u pogledu cilja navedenog sustava, nalaze u usporedivoj činjeničnoj i pravnoj situaciji.
If this is the case, the measure is prima facie selective.
Ako je to slučaj, mjera je a priori selektivna.
As a third step, it is necessary to establish whether the derogating measure is justified by the nature or overall structure of the reference system.
Treće, potrebno je ustanoviti je li mjera odstupanja opravdana naravi ili općom strukturom referentnog sustava.
As regards this third step, the Member State must demonstrate that the differential tax treatment results directly from the basic or guiding principles of its tax system [51] identified as reference system.
U pogledu treće faze na državama je članicama da dokažu da različito porezno postupanje izravno proizlazi iz temeljnih ili vodećih načela poreznog sustava [51] koji je određen kao referentni sustav.
Reference system
Referentni sustav
The reference system is the French corporate tax, levied in principle on all profits or income obtained by companies and other legal persons (Article 205 of the CGI).
Referentni sustav jest francuski porez na dobit kojem u načelu podliježe sva dobit ili prihodi koje ostvaruju poduzetnici i druge pravne osobe (članak 205. Općeg poreznog zakona).
Under the provisions of Article 206(1) and Article 1654 of the CGI, legal persons governed by private or public law engaging in a business or transactions of a profit-making nature are subject to corporate tax.
Primjenom odredbi članka 206. stavka 1. te članka 1654. Općeg poreznog zakona pravne osobe privatnog prava ili javnog prava koje se bave upravljanjem ili djelatnostima koje ostvaruju profit obvezne su plaćati porez na dobit.
Under the provisions of Article 165 of Annex 4 to the CGI, public institutions of an industrial or commercial nature are liable to all direct and assimilated taxes applicable to similar private undertakings.
Primjenom odredbi članka 165. Priloga 4. Općem poreznom zakonu javne industrijske ili gospodarske ustanove obvezne su plaćati sve izravne poreze i povezane namete primjenjive na slične privatne poduzetnike.
Article 167 of Annex 4 to the same Code specifies that these provisions apply in particular to chambers of commerce and industry and to the autonomous ports.
Člankom 167. Priloga 4. istom zakonu određuje se da se te odredbe primjenjuju poglavito na industrijske i gospodarske komore te nezavisne luke.
Neither the French authorities nor interested third parties made any comments on this point following the opening decision.
Ni francuska nadležna tijela ni treće zainteresirane strane nisu o ovome dostavile primjedbe nakon donošenja odluke o otvaranju postupka.
Derogation from the reference system
Odstupanje od referentnog sustava
By virtue of the ministerial decisions of 1942 and 1943 referred to above, ‘the autonomous ports, maritime chambers of commerce, chambers of commerce and industry managing port installations, municipalities which are concessionaires of public equipment owned by the State in the seaports, and undertakings to which they may have entrusted the operation of that equipment’ are exempt from corporate tax.
Na temelju već spomenutih ministarskih odluka iz 1942. i 1943. „nezavisne luke, pomorske gospodarske komore, industrijske i gospodarske komore koje upravljaju lučkom infrastrukturom, zajednice koncesionari javne opreme koja je u državnom vlasništvu u morskim lukama te poduzetnici koji mogu dobiti tu opremu na upravljanje” oslobođeni su plaćanja poreza na dobit.
Contrary to the arguments of certain French ports, the corporate tax exemption in favour of the ports results therefore not from the general provisions of the CGI (and in particular Article 165 of Annex 4 to the CGI) and the non-profit-making nature of the activity of the ports, but from the ministerial decisions of 1942 and 1943, which explicitly derogate from these general provisions and implicitly take the view that the ports engage in profit-making activities [52].
Stoga, suprotno onome što ističu neke francuske luke, oslobođenje luka od plaćanja poreza na dobit ne proizlazi iz općih odredbi Općeg poreznog zakona (posebno članka 165. Priloga 4. Općem poreznom zakonu) te lučkih djelatnosti koje ne ostvaruju profit nego iz ministarskih odluka iz 1942. i 1943. koje izričito odstupaju od tih općih odredbi te implicitno tvrde da luke obavljaju djelatnosti koje ostvaruju profit [52].
This is confirmed by the decision of the Council of State cited by the interested parties [53].
To je potvrđeno odlukom Državnog vijeća koju navode zainteresirane strane [53].
However, in the light of the objective of the reference system, which is to tax the profits made by companies and legal persons, the entities covered by the ministerial decisions of 1942 and 1943 are in a comparable factual and legal situation to that of the other companies or legal persons subject to the tax in so far as all these undertakings generate profits.
Međutim, u pogledu cilja referentnog sustava, odnosno oporezivanja dobiti koje ostvaruju poduzetnici i pravne osobe, subjekti na koje se odnose ministarske odluke iz 1942. i 1943. nalaze se u činjeničnoj i pravnoj situaciji usporedivoj s drugim poduzetnicima i pravnim osobama koje su obvezne plaćati taj porez ako svi ti poduzetnici ostvaruju dobit.
The exemption in question therefore constitutes a derogation from the rules established by the reference tax system.
Dakle, predmetno oslobođenje odstupa od pravila uspostavljenih referentnim poreznim sustavom.
The Commission therefore considers that the tax exemption in favour of the above-mentioned entities is prima facie selective.
Komisija stoga smatra da je porezno oslobođenje u korist prethodno navedenih subjekata prima facie selektivno.
The fact that the measure applies to all French ports, assuming it to have been established [54], does not call this conclusion into question.
Činjenica da se mjera odnosi na sve francuske luke, ako je tako određeno [54], ne osporava ovaj zaključak.
The measure at issue is not general in relation to the reference system, since it applies only to certain undertakings, the port operators, which are nevertheless in a factual and legal situation comparable to that of the other companies or legal persons subject to the tax, in other words to all profit-making undertakings.
Naime, predmetna mjera nije općenita u pogledu referentnog sustava jer se primjenjuje samo na određene poduzetnike (upravitelje luka) koji se nalaze u činjeničnoj i pravnoj situaciji usporedivoj s onom drugih poduzetnika ili pravnih osoba koje su obvezne plaćati taj porez, odnosno svim drugim poduzetnicima koji ostvaruju dobit.
The measure would be general only if a reference system were to be considered which was confined to the ports themselves (a reference system formed by the ministerial decisions of 1942 and 1943), whereas it has been shown above that the reference system consists of the general corporate tax provisions to which undertakings of all sectors are subject.
Mjera je općenita samo ako se uzme u obzir referentni sustav koji se odnosi samo na luke (referentni sustav utvrđen ministarskim odlukama iz 1942. i 1943.), dok je ovdje dokazano da referentni sustav čine opće odredbe poreza na dobit kojeg su obvezni plaćati poduzetnici u svim sektorima.
Furthermore, in the light of the objective of the reference system, which is to subject the profits made by any legal person to income tax, characteristics such as those cited by the French authorities and the interested parties (tasks imposed on the ports for the benefit of other undertakings, special obligations, operation by CCI, absence of competition, financing by port charges and exercise of the official powers of a public authority) will not serve to establish the existence of a different factual and legal situation.
Nadalje, u pogledu cilja referentnog sustava prema kojem su sve pravne osobe obvezne plaćati porez na dobit, karakteristike poput onih koje navode francuska nadležna tijela i zainteresirane strane (zadaće povjerene lukama koje obavljaju za druge poduzetnike, posebne služnosti, upravljanje od strane CCI-jeva, izostanak tržišnog natjecanja, financiranje lučkih pristojbi i korištenje povlastica javnih tijela) nisu važne za određivanje postoji li različita činjenična i pravna situacija.
Although those circumstances can in some cases explain that the operators of ports assigned general interest tasks have a lower profitability and therefore lower taxable profits, they cannot justify the exemption from corporate tax of the profits made, in spite of the costs associated with such general interest tasks.
Iako te okolnosti mogu po potrebi objasniti da upravitelji luka zaduženi za obavljanje zadaća od općeg interesa imaju manju dobit, a time i manju oporezivu dobit, unatoč troškovima povezanima sa zadaćama od općeg interesa ne mogu potvrditi da je ostvarena dobit oslobođena plaćanja poreza na dobit.
The French administration has already recognised, with regard to a request to create a derogating tax regime in favour of the autonomous marina authorities, that ‘the European regulations on competition rules preclude the possibility of granting derogating tax measures in favour of certain activities’ [55].
Nadalje, francuska uprava je u pogledu zahtjeva za stvaranje poreznog sustava koji odstupa u korist nezavisnog upravljanja marinama već odlučila da se u „europskom zakonodavstvu o propisima tržišnog natjecanja ne navodi da porezne mjere odstupanja mogu biti odobrene u korist određenih djelatnosti” [55].
Justification based on the nature and general scheme of the system
Opravdanje utemeljeno na naravi i strukturi sustava
The French authorities state that the measure has been an integral part of the French tax system for over 70 years, but the passage of time cannot suffice to consider a derogation from the normal rules of the system to be justified by the nature and general scheme of the system.
Francuska nadležna tijela navode da je mjera sastavni dio francuskog poreznog sustava već više od 70 godina, no proteklo vrijeme nije dovoljan razlog da bi se odstupanje od uobičajenih propisa tog sustava opravdalo naravi i strukturom sustava.
The passage of time can, on the other hand, be used to justify the use of the procedure for existing aid (see below).
Naprotiv, proteklo vrijeme može opravdati upotrebu postupka za postojeće potpore (vidjeti u nastavku).
The Commission considers that the inherent logic of the reference system in this case is to tax profits.
Nadalje, Komisija smatra da je logika svojstvena predmetnom referentnom sustavu oporezivanje dobiti.
A tax exemption based solely on belonging to a certain category of undertakings or granted only to certain entities identified by law is not in keeping with this logic.
Stoga, oslobođenje od plaćanja poreza utemeljeno samo na pripadnosti nekoj određenoj kategoriji poduzetnika ili koje je priznato samo nekim subjektima određenima zakonom ne pripada toj logici.
Finally, as regards the assertion by certain interested parties that the measure at issue does not create any ‘clear breach of the principle of equal treatment’, the Commission would point out that the fact that a measure does not create any ‘clear breach of the principle of equal treatment’ in French law does not mean that it derives directly from the intrinsic basic or guiding principles of the reference system or is the result of inherent mechanisms necessary for the functioning and effectiveness of the system (***) [56] within the meaning of State aid law.
Naposljetku, u pogledu potvrde nekih zainteresiranih strana prema kojoj predmetna mjera ne stvara „povredu načela jednakosti”, Komisija primjećuje da činjenica da neka mjera ne stvara „povredu načela jednakosti” u francuskom pravu ne znači da ona „izravno proizlazi iz temeljnih ili vodećih unutarnjih načela referentnog sustava ili […] mehanizama svojstvenih sustavu potrebnih za njegovo funkcioniranje i učinkovitost” (***) [56] u smislu prava državnih potpora.
As found in the decision of the Constitutional Council [57], the evaluation of the principle of equality in French law takes into consideration the objectives pursued by the derogating measure, i.e. objectives of generalinterest extrinsic to the tax system, which cannot be used at the stage of justification by the nature and general scheme of the tax system.
Na taj način, kako proizlazi iz odluke Ustavnog vijeća [57], procjena načelajednakosti u francuskom pravu uzima u obzir ciljeve mjere odstupanja odnosno ciljeve od općeg interesa izvan poreznog sustava koji se ne mogu upotrebljavati u fazi opravdanja naravi ili strukturom poreznog sustava.
Although objectives extrinsic to the system may possibly be taken into account at the stage of the assessment of the compatibility of aid, they do not permit justification of the selectivity of a derogation or, therefore, demonstration of the absence of State aid.
Ako vanjski ciljevi sustava eventualno mogu biti uzeti u obzir u fazi procjene spojivosti neke potpore, oni ne mogu opravdati selektivnost nekog odstupanja i dokazati nepostojanje državne potpore.
In addition, the decision of the Constitutional Council mentioned by the interested parties does not concern the ministerial decisions exempting the ports from corporate tax, but a legislative text exempting certain sports meetings from a tax with a different intrinsic logic to that of corporate tax.
Nadalje, odluka Ustavnog vijeća koju spominju zainteresirane strane ne odnosi se na ministarske odluke kojime se luke oslobađaju plaćanja poreza na dobit, već na zakonodavni tekst koji neke sportske događaje oslobađa od plaćanja poreza čija je unutarnja logika različita od one poreza na dobit.
The Commission therefore considers that the corporate tax exemption is not justified by the nature and general scheme of the French tax system.
Komisija stoga smatra da oslobođenje od plaćanja poreza na dobit nije opravdano naravi i strukturom francuskog poreznog sustava.
These two criteria are closely linked.
Ova su dva kriterija usko povezana.
As the Court recalled in particular in the Eventech judgment [58]:
Sud je na to podsjetio i u presudi Eventech [58],
in accordance with the Court's settled case-law, for the purpose of categorising a national measure as State aid, it is necessary, not to establish that the aid has a real effect on trade between Member States and that competition is actually being distorted, but only to examine whether that aid is liable to affect such trade and distort competition (the judgment in Libert and Others, C-197/11 and C-203/11, EU:C:2013:288, paragraph 76 and case-law cited).
[…] prema ustaljenoj sudskoj praksi Suda i u svrhu kvalificiranja nacionalne mjere kao državne potpore nije potrebno utvrditi stvarni utjecaj predmetne potpore na trgovinu među državama članicama i stvarno narušavanje tržišnog natjecanja, već samo ispitati može li ta potpora utjecati na trgovinu i narušiti tržišno natjecanje (presuda Libert i dr., C-197/11 i C-203/11, EU:C:2013:288, točka 76. i navedena sudska praksa).
In particular, when aid granted by a Member State strengthens the position of an undertaking compared with other undertakings competing in intra-Community trade, the latter must be regarded as affected by that aid (see, to that effect, the judgment in Libert and Others, EU:C:2013:288, paragraph 77 and case-law cited).
Posebno se smatra da kada potpora koju dodijeli država članica jača položaj poduzetnika u odnosu na ostale konkurentske poduzetnike u razmjenu unutar Zajednice, ta potpora utječe na tu razmjenu (vidjeti, u tom smislu, presudu Libert i dr., EU:C:2013:288, točku 77. i navedenu sudsku praksu).
In that regard, it is not necessary that the beneficiary undertakings are themselves involved in intra-Community trade.
U tom pogledu nije nužno da poduzetnik koji je korisnik potpore sam sudjeluje u trgovini unutar Unije.
Where a Member State grants aid to undertakings, internal activity may be maintained or increased as a result, so that the opportunities for undertakings established in other Member States to penetrate the market in that Member State are thereby reduced (see, to that effect, the judgment in Libert and Others, EU:C:2013:288, paragraph 78 and case-law cited).
Naime, kada država članica poduzetnicima dodijeli potporu, unutarnja se djelatnost njome može održati istom ili povećati, uz posljedicu da mogućnosti ulaska poduzeća osnovanih u drugim državama članicama na tržište te države budu smanjene (vidjeti, u tom smislu, presudu Libert i dr., EU:C:2013:288, točka 78. i navedenu sudsku praksu).
Further, according to the Court's case-law, there is no threshold or percentage below which it may be considered that trade between Member States is not affected.
Nadalje, prema sudskoj praksi Suda, ne postoji donja granica ili postotak ispod čije bi se razine moglo smatrati da trgovina među državama članicama nije pogođena.
The relatively small amount of aid or the relatively small size of the undertaking which receives it does not as such exclude the possibility that trade between Member States might be affected (the judgment in Altmark Trans and Regierungspräsidium Magdeburg, C-280/00, EU:C:2003:415, paragraph 81).
Naime, relativno skromna potpora ili relativno mala veličina poduzeća korisnika potpore ne isključuje a priori mogućnost da trgovina među državama članicama bude pogođena (presuda Altmark Trans i Regierungspräsidium Magdeburg, C-280/00, EU:C:2003:415, točka 81.).
Consequently, the condition that the aid must be capable of affecting trade between Member States does not depend on the local or regional character of the transport services supplied or on the scale of the field of activity concerned (the judgment in Altmark Trans and Regierungspräsidium Magdeburg, EU:C:2003:415, paragraph 82).’
Slijedom toga uvjet u skladu s kojim potpora mora biti takva da utječe na trgovinu među državama članicama ne ovisi o lokalnoj ili regionalnoj naravi pruženih prometnih usluga ili o važnosti navedenog područja djelatnosti (presuda Altmark Trans i Regierungspräsidium Magdeburg, EU:C:2003:415, točka 82.).”
In the Wam judgment [59], the Court stressed the following in particular:
U presudi Wam [59] posebno je naglasila sljedeće:
the fact that an economic sector has been liberalised at Community level may serve to determine that the aid has a real or potential effect on competition and affects trade between Member States (Cassa di Risparmio di Firenze and Others, paragraph 142 and the case-law cited).
[…] okolnost da je neki gospodarski sektor liberaliziran na razini Unije pokazuje stvarni ili mogući učinak koji potpora ima na tržišno natjecanje kao i njihov utjecaj na trgovinu među državama članicama (presuda Cassa di Risparmio di Firenze e.a., već navedeno, točka 142. i prethodno navedena sudska praksa).
With regard to the condition of the distortion of competition, it should be borne in mind in that regard that, in principle, aid intended to release an undertaking from costs which it would normally have to bear in its day-to-day management or normal activities distorts the conditions of competition (see Case C-156/98 Germany v Commission [2000] ECR I-6857, paragraph 30, and Heiser, paragraph 55).’
U pogledu uvjeta narušavanja tržišnog natjecanja valja naglasiti da potpore koje poduzetnika oslobađaju troškova koje bi inače snosio u okviru svojeg redovnog upravljanja ili svojih uobičajenih djelatnosti u pravilu narušavaju uvjete tržišnog natjecanja (presuda od 19. rujna 2000., Njemačka protiv Komisije, C1-56/98, ECR I-6857, točka 30. i Heiser, već navedeno, točka 55.).”
In the present case, the tax advantage in favour of the ports concerned frees them from a current charge which they would normally have to bear.
Naime, u ovom slučaju porezna prednost koju imaju predmetne luke oslobađa iste od tekućih troškova koje bi inače trebali podmirivati.
It is of a nature to favour them in relation to French ports and foreign ports of the European Union which do not benefit from that advantage.
Mjera ih stavlja u povoljniji položaj u odnosu na francuske luke i inozemne luke Europske unije koje ju ne upotrebljavaju.
Thus it is liable to affect intra-Community trade and to distort competition.
Stoga su mogući utjecaj na trgovinu unutar Europske unije i narušavanje tržišnog natjecanja.
There is competition in the port sector, and it is exacerbated by the nature and characteristics specific to transport, and especially maritime and inland waterway transport.
Naime, tržišno natjecanje postoji u lučkom sektoru te ga narav i karakteristike prometa, posebno pomorskog prometa i prometa unutarnjim plovnim putovima, dodatno pojačavaju.
Even though it may be considered that the ports hold a legal monopoly to offer port services within the port they operate, the transport services they offer are, at least to a certain extent, in competition with those offered by or in other ports and by other providers of transport services both in France [60] and in other Member States.
Čak i ako je moguće ustanoviti da luke imaju zakonski monopol u pružanju lučkih usluga u unutrašnjosti luka kojima upravljaju, prometne su usluge koje pružaju, barem u određenoj mjeri, u tržišnom natjecanju s onima koje nude druge luke kao i drugi pružatelji prometnih usluga kako u Francuskoj [60] tako i u drugim državama članicama.