natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
On the basis of this provision, a measure can be classified as State aid if all of the following tests are met: (i) the measure is imputable to the State; (ii) the measure is selective; (iii) the measure confers an economic advantage on the beneficiary; and (iv) the measure distorts or threatens to distort competition and is likely to affect trade between Member States.
Na temelju te odredbe, kvalifikacija mjere kao državne potpore podrazumijeva da su ispunjeni sljedeći kumulativni uvjeti: i. da je mjera pripisiva državi; ii. da je mjera selektivna; iii. da je mjerom dodijeljena gospodarska prednost njezinu korisniku i iv. da se mjerom narušava ili prijeti da će se narušiti tržišno natjecanje te da se njome može utjecati na trgovinu među državama članicama.
Existence of State resources and imputability
Postojanje državnih sredstava i kriterij pripisivosti
The FDES loans were granted by Order of the Minister for Economic and Financial Affairs, implementation of which was entrusted to the Director-General of the Treasury.
Zajmovi FDES-a dodijeljeni su odlukom ministra gospodarstva i financija, a njezina je provedba povjerena glavnom upravitelju državne riznice.
The relevant funds come from a special Treasury account and repayments of principal and interest are also paid into France's national budget.
Predmetna sredstva proizlaze iz posebnog računa državne riznice, a povrati glavnice i kamate uplaćuju se u proračun Francuske.
The loans are signed, paid and managed by Natixis on behalf of France, on the basis of an agreement signed between Natixis and France.
Banka Natixis potpisuje i isplaćuje zajam te njime upravlja u ime Francuske na temelju sporazuma potpisanog između banke Natixis i Francuske.
By its very nature, a write-off of tax and social security debts would constitute a use of public resources.
Otpis poreznih i socijalnih dugova po svojoj naravi podrazumijeva upotrebu javnih sredstava.
It would mean France foregoing revenue and would therefore have a direct impact on the country's budget.
Njime se Francuska odriče prihoda te on stoga utječe izravno na njezin proračun.
Accordingly, the Commission concludes that the measures in question involve State resources and are imputable to France.
Prema tome, Komisija zaključuje da mjere koje se ispituju obuhvaćaju državna sredstva te da su pripisive Francuskoj.
The Commission notes that the loans under investigation were granted in favour of FagorBrandt and Groupe Brandt, the company which took over FagorBrandt's assets.
Komisija tvrdi da su zajmovi koji se ispituju dodijeljeni u korist društva FagorBrandt i društva korisnika preuzimanja imovine društva FagorBrandt, odnosno društva Groupe Brandt.
Although the remit of the FDES is to grant loans for economic and social development under the conditions laid down in the Circular of 26 November 2004 [19] on State action in the prevention and resolution of business difficulties, which governs its operation, the granting of loans by the FDES is always subject to a case-by-case examination.
Naime, iako je zadatak FDES-a dodjela zajmova za gospodarski i socijalni razvoj u uvjetima predviđenima okružnicom od 26. studenoga 2004. [19] o djelovanju države u svrhu suzbijanja i rješavanja teškoća poduzetnika kojom je uređen njegov rad, svaki se slučaj dodjele zajmova FDES-a uvijek pojedinačno ispituje.
The selectivity condition is therefore met.
Stoga je uvjet selektivnosti ispunjen.
On the other hand, the information gathered during the in-depth investigation, including France's response to the opening decision, indicates that the write-off of tax and social security debts took place within the normal framework of the rules applicable to undertakings in administration generating this type of claim.
S druge strane, s obzirom na elemente prikupljene tijekom temeljite istrage i, osobito, odgovor Francuske na odluku o pokretanju postupka, očito je da je do otpisa poreznih i socijalnih dugova došlo u uobičajenom okviru pravila primjenjivih na poduzetnike u predstečajnom postupku u kojem nastaju takva potraživanja.
Therefore, in accordance with the rules applicable to undertakings in administration, during the observation period FagorBrandt continued to pay its social security and tax charges, but a part of these charges was not due when the company went into liquidation and was therefore entered as a liability incurred during FagorBrandt's observation period.
Stoga je, u skladu s propisima primjenjivima na poduzetnike u predstečajnom postupku, društvo FagorBrandt tijekom razdoblja promatranja nastavilo plaćati svoja socijalna i porezna davanja, ali dio tih davanja u trenutku likvidacije nije bio naplativ te je prenesen u obveze iz razdoblja promatranja društva FagorBrandt.
As part of the liquidation of FagorBrandt, these charges will be paid in accordance with their respective rank pursuant to Article L. 622-17 of the French Commercial Code.
U okviru likvidacije društva FagorBrandt, ta su davanja plaćena u skladu s njihovim redom na temelju članka L. 622-17 Trgovačkog zakonika.
It therefore appears that there was no write-off of tax and social security debts in favour of FagorBrandt, but an application in accordance with the general framework applicable to undertakings in administration.
Stoga je očito da porezne i socijalne obveze društva FagorBrandt nisu otpisane, nego da su se provele u skladu s općim okvirom primjenjivim na poduzetnike u predstečajnom postupku.
Consequently, the Commission concludes that FagorBrandt was not afforded selective treatment by means of a write-off of tax and social security debts.
Prema tome, Komisija zaključuje da se s društvom FagorBrandt nije selektivno postupalo putem otpisa poreznih i socijalnih dugova.
Consequently, the Commission concludes that the FDES loans were selective measures.
Stoga Komisija utvrđuje da su zajmovi FDES-a bili selektivne mjere.
In contrast, no selective measures were awarded to FagorBrandt by means of a write-off of tax and social security debts.
Naprotiv, društvu FagorBrandt nije dodijeljena selektivna mjera putem otpisa poreznih i socijalnih dugova.
It is settled case-law that, in order to determine whether a State measure constitutes aid within the meaning of Article 107(1) TFEU, it is necessary to establish whether the recipient undertaking receives an economic advantage which it would not have obtained under normal market conditions [20].
U skladu s ustaljenom sudskom praksom, kako bi se ocijenilo predstavlja li državna mjera potporu u smislu članka 107. stavka 1. UFEU-a, potrebno je utvrditi je li poduzetnik korisnik ostvario gospodarsku prednost koju ne bi ostvario u uobičajenim tržišnim uvjetima [20].
An economic advantage exists whenever the financial situation of an undertaking is improved as a result of State intervention.
Gospodarska prednost postoji kada se financijski položaj poduzetnika poboljša državnom intervencijom.
However, intervention by a public authority does not necessarily confer an advantage on the beneficiary, and as such does not constitute aid if it is carried out under normal market conditions, in other words, if the public authority acted as a prudent operator in a market economy would have done in similar circumstances.
Međutim, intervencijom javnog tijela ne dodjeljuje se nužno prednost njezinu korisniku i stoga ona ne čini državnu potporu ako je poduzeta u uobičajenim tržišnim uvjetima, odnosno ako se javno tijelo ponijelo kao što bi se razuman subjekt u tržišnom gospodarstvu ponio u sličnoj situaciji.
In this regard, the presence of significant investments of the same kind, carried out at the same time as the State intervention by other private operators taking similar risks (‘pari passu’), may provide an indication that France behaved as a prudent investor.
U tom pogledu, činjenica da su drugi privatni subjekti koji poduzimaju slične rizike („pari passu”) proveli znatna ulaganja iste prirode istodobno s intervencijom Francuske može biti pokazatelj da se Francuska ponijela kao razuman ulagač.
Political background to the granting of the two FDES loans
Političke okolnosti dodjele dvaju zajmova FDES-a
From the outset, the French Government gave assurances that it would support FagorBrandt whatever the cost, regardless of the amount of private funds eventually loaned to the company [21].
Francuska je vlada od samog početka jamčila da će podupirati društvo FagorBrandt po bilo kojoj cijeni, neovisno o privatnom novčanom iznosu konačno pozajmljenom društvu FagorBrandt [21].
For example, two days before the court-supervised administration procedure was initiated, on 5 November 2013, the French Government announced that: ‘Every effort must be made to preserve the industrial facilities of the household appliances group Fagor, which has a future in France’ [22].
Na primjer, dva dana prije pokretanja predstečajnog postupka, 5. studenoga 2013., francuska je vlada izjavila sljedeće: „Potrebno je učiniti sve da se očuva industrijsko postrojenje grupe za proizvodnju električnih kućanskih uređaja Fagor, koja ima budućnost u Francuskoj” [22].
On 6 November 2013, as a central works council met to discuss the future of the group, the Minister for Economic Regeneration explained that ‘the government wants to rescue as many industrial sites and jobs as it can at FagorBrandt’ [23].
Ministar oporavka proizvodnje pojasnio je za vrijeme sastanka središnjeg odbora poduzeća o budućnosti grupe 6. studenoga 2013. da „[v]lada želi spasiti što je više moguće industrijskih postrojenja i radnih mjesta društva FagorBrandt” [23].
On 11 April 2014, a press release by the Minister for the Economy, Economic Regeneration and the Digital Economy — issued further to the decision of the Commercial Court in San Sebastian (Spain) which opened the way for the sale of FagorBrandt's trademarks to the Cevital group — explained that: ‘The government has stood by FagorBrandt since the beginning and will provide financial backing for the takeover bid so as to ensure the sustainability of its industrial facilities and protect jobs’.
U priopćenju za tisak od 11. travnja 2014. ministra gospodarstva, oporavka proizvodnje i digitalnog gospodarstva, koji je dao izjavu nakon odluke Trgovačkog suda u San Sebastiánu (Španjolska) kojom je otvoren put prodaji marki društva FagorBrandt grupi Cevital, objašnjeno je sljedeće: „Vlada je otpočetka bila uz FAGOR-BRANDT te će, u okviru njegova preuzimanja, podržati financiranje te ponude kako bi osigurala održivost industrijskog postrojenja i očuvanje radnih mjesta”.
On 14 April 2014, a further press release by the Minister for the Economy, Economic Regeneration and the Digital Economy and the Minister for Labour, Employment and Industrial Relations — this time following the ruling of the Nanterre Commercial Court in favour of the takeover of FagorBrandt by the Cevital group — announced: ‘The Minister will keep a close eye on the restart of production on each site’.
U novom priopćenju za tisak od 14. travnja 2014. ministra gospodarstva, oporavka proizvodnje i digitalnog gospodarstva te ministra rada, zapošljavanja i socijalnog dijaloga, koji je ovaj put dao izjavu nakon odluke Trgovačkog suda u Nanterreu kojom je odobreno da grupa Cevital preuzme društvo FagorBrandt, izjavljeno je sljedeće: „Ministar će nastojati ponovno staviti u pogon sva postrojenja.”
Accordingly, the Commission notes that, at each stage of the court-supervised administration procedure, France has publicly and repeatedly demonstrated its determination to ensure that FagorBrandt stays in business, for reasons relating to the preservation of business and jobs that a private investor would not be able to rely on and which contradict the supposed prudent nature of the lending transactions.
Prema tome, Komisija navodi da je Francuska u svakoj fazi sudskog postupka javno i neprestano pokazivala svoju odlučnost da zajamči gospodarski kontinuitet društva FagorBrandt kako bi se očuvala djelatnost i radna mjesta, u čemu privatni ulagač ne bi ustrajao, što je suprotno tvrdnji da su dodjele zajmova bile razumne.
In addition, the Commission notes that the assets of Fagor Electrodomésticos (under a safeguard procedure since October 2013 in Spain), which were previously allocated to FagorBrandt, were acquired by CATA-CAN without public support.
Usto, Komisija podsjeća na to da je imovinu društva Fagor Electrodomésticos (u postupku sanacije od listopada 2013. u Španjolskoj), koja je prije bila dio društva FagorBrandt, stekla grupa CATA-CAN bez ikakve javne potpore.
CATA-CAN took over the industrial production of household appliances in September 2014.
Potonja je u rujnu 2014. preuzela industrijsku proizvodnju električnih kućanskih uređaja.
Finally, Cevital's commitment to purchase FagorBrandt was conditional on the obtainment of financing, including the second FDES loan.
Naposljetku, obveza grupe Cevital da kupi društvo FagorBrandt bila je uvjetovana dobivanjem financiranja, uključujući drugi zajam FDES-a.
As explained in section 2.2, the public loans (FDES) and private loans (Thémis) were granted on the same terms for tranche A (EUR 5 million), but on different terms for tranche B.
Kao što je objašnjeno u odjeljku 2.2., tranša A (5 milijuna EUR) javnih (FDES) i privatnih zajmova (Thémis) dodijeljena je pod istim uvjetima, za razliku od tranše B.
During the collective proceedings, two private banks [25] refused to grant a loan of EUR 5 million as they deemed the collateral insufficient given the level of risk.
Tijekom stečajnog postupka dvije su privatne banke [25] odbile dodijeliti zajam od 5 milijuna EUR jer su procijenile da instrumenti osiguranja nisu bili dovoljni s obzirom na razinu rizika.
The delay of one month in the repayment of tranche B confirms the risk analysis carried out by the private lenders [26].
Kašnjenje od mjesec dana u pogledu tranše B potvrđuje analizu rizika koju su proveli privatni zajmodavci [26].
On the other hand, the FDES incurred exposure of EUR 10 million, then EUR 47,5 million, despite the delay in repaying tranche B.
S druge strane, FDES je isplatio 10 milijuna EUR, zatim 47,5 milijuna EUR, i to usprkos kašnjenju isplate tranše B.
Moreover, the FDES loan of EUR 10 million bears interest at the same level as the loan for half that amount granted by Thémis (EUR 5 million).
Osim toga, za zajam FDES-a od 10 milijuna EUR ostvarena je jednaka naknada kao za dvostruko manji zajam koji je dodijelila banka Thémis (5 milijuna EUR).
The Commission also notes that France did not contest this point in its reply to the opening decision, even though this was one of the main doubts raised by the Commission in the decision.
Komisija, uostalom, napominje da Francuska nije osporila tu tvrdnju u svojem odgovoru na odluku u pokretanju postupka, iako je bila riječ o jednoj od glavnih sumnji koje je Komisija iznijela u odluci o pokretanju postupka.
In granting tranche B of the FDES loan, France conferred an economic advantage that a prudent lender would not have granted, or at least not on the same terms.
Francuska je, time što je dodijelila tranšu B zajma FDES-a, dala gospodarsku prednost koju razumni zajmodavac ne bi dodijelio ili barem ne pod istim uvjetima.
Tranche B has collateral which, though not weak (part of it is first-rank), cannot be considered strong, given that tranche B competes in this respect with tranche A of the FDES and Thémis loans (for the first-ranked guarantees) and benefits from a lower rank with regard to the pledge on immovable property.
Tranša B osigurana je instrumentima osiguranja koje se, iako nisu niski (dio njih je prvog reda), ipak ne može smatrati visokima jer je tranša B u tom pogledu na istoj razini kao i tranša A zajmova FDES-a i banke Thémis (za jamstva prvog reda), a osigurana je nižim redom u pogledu založnog prava na nekretnini.
The collateral can therefore be considered normal within the meaning of the 2008 Communication.
Stoga se instrumenti osiguranja mogu smatrati uobičajenima u smislu Komunikacije iz 2008.
Given its financial situation when the loan was granted, FagorBrandt must be considered a CCC-rated undertaking within the meaning of the 2008 Communication.
S obzirom na njegov financijski položaj u trenutku dodjele zajma, društvo FagorBrandt potrebno je smatrati poduzetnikom s rejtingom CCC u smislu Komunikacije iz 2008.
In the absence of any evidence that would call into question the interest rates set out in the 2008 Communication, the Commission takes the view that the market rate can be calculated in accordance with it, giving a rate of 7,03 % (0,53 %, the reference rate for France at the time the loan was granted + 650 basis points).
U nedostatku elemenata kojima bi se dovele u pitanje kamatne stope iz Komunikacije iz 2008., Komisija smatra da se kamatna stopa u tržišnim uvjetima može izračunati na temelju te Komunikacije i da iznosi 7,03 % (odnosno 0,53 %, što je bila referentna stopa Francuske u trenutku dodjele zajma + 650 baznih bodova).
Following its previous practice, the Commission considers that the amount of the aid is equal to the difference between the interest rate calculated with reference to the 2008 Communication (7,03 %) applied to the loan principal, i.e. EUR 10 million, and the interest rate ([5-10] %) applied by France to the loan principal, i.e. EUR 10 million, calculated for the period during which the amount was made available to FagorBrandt [27].
S obzirom na prethodnu praksu, Komisija smatra da iznos potpore odgovara razlici između kamatne stope izračunane na temelju Komunikacije iz 2008. (7,03 %) i primijenjene na glavnicu zajma, odnosno 10 milijuna EUR, i kamatne stope, koju upotrebljava Francuska ([5 – 10] %), primijenjene na glavnicu zajma, odnosno 10 milijuna EUR, izračunane za razdoblje u kojem je iznos stavljen na raspolaganje društvu FagorBrandt [27].
Accordingly, the Commission estimates that the collateral can be considered normal within the meaning of the 2008 Communication.
Prema tome, Komisija smatra da se instrumenti osiguranja mogu smatrati uobičajenima u smislu Komunikacije iz 2008.
Interest rates.
Kamatne stope.
In response to the opening decision, France claims that the Commission was wrong to give Groupe Brandt a CCC rating because the company is part of the Cevital group, which is rated BB or even B. This argument is surprising to say the least.
U odgovoru na odluku o pokretanju postupka Francuska navodi da je Komisija pogrešno dodijelila društvu Groupe Brandt rejting CCC, s obzirom na to da je taj poduzetnik dio grupe Cevital, kojoj je dodijeljen rejting BB, odnosno B. Taj je argument u najmanju ruku iznenađujuć.
Cevital is neither the borrower nor the guarantor of the FDES loan.
Naime, grupa Cevital nije ni zajmoprimac, ni jamac zajma FDES-a.
The fact that the Cevital group is in such good financial health that it has a BB or even a B rating may reassure financial institutions thinking of lending to a subsidiary of the Cevital group, but in no way guarantees against the risk represented by Groupe Brandt's CCC rating.
Činjenica da je grupa Cevital u dobrom financijskom položaju zbog kojeg je njegov rejting BB, odnosno B, može eventualno ohrabriti financijske ustanove koje bi mogle dodijeliti zajam društvu kćeri grupe Cevital, ali ni na koji način ne umanjuje rizik ocijenjen ocjenom CCC koji nosi društvo Groupe Brandt.
On that basis, if France's argument that Groupe Brandt's borrowing capacity should be measured against that of Cevital is accepted, it is surprising to say the least that no private investor felt inclined to lend to Groupe Brandt.
U tom pogledu, iako je potrebno prihvatiti argument Francuske prema kojem je sposobnost zaduživanja društva Groupe Brandt potrebno procijeniti u odnosu na sposobnost zaduživanja grupe Cevital, u najmanju je ruku iznenađujuće da nijedan privatni ulagač nije bio spreman dodijeliti zajam društvu Groupe Brandt.
Moreover, as described in section 7.1.3.1, the statements of France's various representatives show that the sole purpose of the support measures was to come to the rescue of FagorBrandt and Groupe Brandt. This was what was stated publicly to the creditors.
Osim toga, kao što je opisano u odjeljku 7.1.3.1., izjave različitih predstavnika Francuske ukazuju na to da je jedini i isključivi cilj mjera potpore bio spasiti društva FagorBrandt i Groupe Brandt te je kao takav bio javno predstavljen vjerovnicima.
This argument cannot therefore be upheld.
Stoga se taj argument ne može prihvatiti.
Moreover, France asserts that the private lenders lent the money for each tranche at the same rate as the FDES.
Nadalje, Francuska tvrdi da su privatni zajmodavci svaku tranšu pozajmili po istoj stopi kao i FDES.
Although the A tranches of the FDES and private loans benefit from the same terms (EURIBOR + [300-600] basis points) and the same collateral, the amount of tranche A of the FDES loan is almost five times higher than that of the A tranches of the private loans.
Točno je da tranše A zajma FDES-a i privatnih zajmova imaju iste uvjete (EURIBOR + [300–600] baznih bodova) te iste instrumente osiguranja, međutim, iznos tranše A zajma FDES-a gotovo je pet puta veći od iznosa tranše A privatnih zajmova.
Similarly, the B tranches of the FDES and private loans are subject to the same terms (EURIBOR + [300-600] basis points), even though, again, the amount of tranche B of the FDES loan is almost five times higher.
Jednako tako, tranše B zajmova FDES-a i privatnih zajmova, naime, podliježu istim uvjetima (EURIBOR + [300–600] baznih bodova), iako je iznos tranše B zajma FDES-a i dalje gotovo pet puta veći.
As regards tranche C, the Commission notes that the remuneration rate is higher than that of tranches A ([0-5] %) and B ([0-5] %), while its maturity is shorter than that of the other tranches.
U pogledu tranše C, Komisija ističe da je stopa naknade veća od stope tranši A ([0 – 5] %) i B ([0–5] %), dok je njezino dospijeće kraće od dospijeća drugih tranši.
Although the loans are divided into different tranches, the public and private loans should be analysed in their entirety.
Iako su zajmovi podijeljeni na različite tranše, javne i privatne zajmove valja analizirati kao cjelinu.
Examining the FDES loan and the loans from Société Générale and Natixis as a whole clearly reveals the asymmetry between each creditor's exposure: France lent six times more than each of the banks, which — unlike France — are precisely in the business of providing companies with cash.
Cjelovito promatranje zajma FDES-a te zajmova banaka Société Générale i Natixis očito ukazuje na asimetriju među vjerovnicima u pogledu izloženosti rizicima: Francuska je pozajmila šest puta veći iznos od bilo koje od banaka koje se, za razliku od Francuske, bave upravo dodjelom novčanih sredstava poduzetnicima.
This occurred even though Société Générale and Natixis have long conducted business deals with FagorBrandt, of which Group Brandt may be considered the successor [28], and even though they belong to a pool of financiers set up to support the company [29].
To vrijedi iako banke Société Générale i Natixis već dugo održavaju poslovne odnose s društvom FagorBrandt, čijim se sljednikom može smatrati društvo Groupe Brandt [28], te iako su te banke članovi bankovnog konzorcija uspostavljenog u svrhu podrške tom poduzetniku [29].
France, which does not appear to have any interest in the continuation of FagorBrandt, first lent EUR 10 million to the company and then, despite the late repayment of tranche B of this loan, granted a further loan more than four times the size of the first.
Francuska, koja a priori nema interes da društvo FagorBrandt nastavi poslovati, najprije je pozajmila 10 milijuna EUR, a zatim je, unatoč kašnjenju povrata tranše B tog zajma, dodijelila novi zajam koji je više od četiri puta veći od prvog zajma.
No prudent lender would have done such a thing; witness the fact the Thémis did not grant any loans other than the loan of EUR 5 million.
Nijedan razuman vjerovnik ne bi postupio na taj način: dokaz je tome činjenica da banka Thémis nakon zajma od 5 milijuna EUR nije dodijelila drugi zajam.
Moreover, although it was six times the size of the loans from Société Générale and Natixis, the FDES loan benefited from the same collateral as the latter.
Osim toga, iako šest puta veći od zajmova banaka Société Générale i Natixis, zajam FDES-a osiguran je istim instrumentima osiguranja kao i potonji zajmovi.