natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Therefore, in accordance with Article 1(f) of Regulation (EU) 2015/1589, the contested tax ruling constitutes unlawful aid, put into effect in contravention of Article 108(3) of the Treaty.
Porezno rješenje od 6. studenoga 2003., kojim je Luksemburg odobrio sustav određivanja transfernih cijena koji je predložilo društvo Amazon.com, Inc. na temelju kojeg je društvo Amazon EU S.á.r.l. procjenjivalo svoju obvezu plaćanja poreza na dobit trgovačkih društava u Luksemburgu od 2006. do 2014., i naknadno prihvaćanje godišnje prijave poreza na dobit na temelju tog rješenja čine potporu u smislu članka 107. stavka 1.
RECOVERY
Ugovora o funkcioniranju Europske unije koja nije spojiva s unutarnjim tržištem i koju je Luksemburg nezakonito proveo protivno članku 108. stavku 3.
THE RECOVERY OBLIGATION
Ugovora o funkcioniranju Europske unije.
Article 16(1) of Regulation (EU) 2015/1589 establishes an obligation on the Commission to order recovery of unlawful and incompatible aid.
Članak 2.
That provision also provides that the Member State concerned shall take all necessary measures to recover unlawful aid that is found to be incompatible.
Luksemburg osigurava povrat nespojive i nezakonite državne potpore iz članka 1. od društva Amazon EU S.á.r.l.
Commission Regulation (EC) No 794/2004 elaborates the methods to be used for the calculation of recovery interest.
Na iznose koji se moraju vratiti obračunavaju se kamate od datuma kad su ti iznosi korisniku stavljeni na raspolaganje do njihova stvarnog povrata.
Finally, Article 16(3) of Regulation (EU) 2015/1589 states that ‘recovery shall be effected without delay and in accordance with the procedures under the national law of the Member State concerned, provided that they allow for the immediate an effective execution of the Commission decision’.
Kamate se obračunavaju na temelju složenog kamatnog računa u skladu s poglavljem V. Uredbe Komisije (EZ) br. 794/2004.
NEW AID
Članak 3.
In accordance with Article 17 of Regulation (EU) 2015/1589, the power of the Commission to recover aid is subject to a limitation period of 10 years.
Povrat dodijeljene potpore iz članka 1. ima trenutačni učinak.
The limitation period begins on the day on which the unlawful aid is awarded to the beneficiary either as individual aid or as aid under an aid scheme.
Luksemburg osigurava provedbu ove Odluke u roku od četiri mjeseca od datuma obavijesti.
Any action taken by the Commission or by a Member State, acting at the request of the Commission, with regard to the unlawful aid interrupts the limitation period.
Članak 4.
Each interruption starts time running afresh.
Luksemburg u roku od dva mjeseca od obavijesti o ovoj Odluci dostavlja informacije o metodi koju je upotrijebio za izračun točnog iznosa potpore.
The limitation period is suspended for as long as the decision of the Commission is the subject of proceedings pending before the Court of Justice.
Luksemburg izvješćuje Komisiju o napretku nacionalnih mjera poduzetih radi provedbe ove Odluke do potpunog povrata potpore iz članka 1.
Finally, any aid with regard to which the limitation period has expired is deemed to be existing aid.
Na zahtjev Komisije, on odmah dostavlja informacije o već poduzetim mjerama i mjerama planiranim radi usklađivanja s ovom Odlukom.
Amazon argues that any aid granted under the contested tax ruling is existing aid, because the contested tax ruling is an individual measure granted to it more than 10 years before the Commission started its State aid investigation into that ruling.
Članak 5.
The contested tax ruling was indeed issued more than 10 years before the Commission started its investigation, namely on 6 November 2003.
Ova je Odluka upućena Velikom Vojvodstvu Luksemburgu.
However, contrary to what Amazon claims, that does not mean that all and any aid granted under it constitutes existing aid that cannot be recovered.
Sastavljeno u Bruxellesu 4. listopada 2017.
In the present case, the aid granted as a result of the contested tax ruling was granted on an annual basis, at the moment when LuxOpCo had to pay its corporate income tax in Luxembourg.
Za Komisiju
That is because the purpose of the contested tax ruling was to enable LuxOpCo to determine, over a certain period of time, its annual corporate income tax liability in Luxembourg.
Članica Komisije
That ruling endorses a transfer pricing arrangement that allows LuxOpCo to determine its transfer prices, which in turn determine its annual taxable profit.
SL C 44, 6.2.2015., str. 13.
That amount of profit is then declared in its annual corporate income tax declaration, which Luxembourg has accepted each and every year during the relevant period.
Ako nije navedeno drugačije, Komisija je prihvatila sve zahtjeve Luksemburga i društva Amazon za produljenje roka.
The aid is thus granted under the contested tax ruling every year that that declaration is accepted by the Luxembourg tax administration.
Povjerljive informacije.
What this means for the present case is that only aid granted before 24 June 2004 constitutes existing aid, since the limitation period laid down by Article 17 of Regulation (EU) 2015/1589 was interrupted on 24 June 2014, the date on which the Commission sent a letter to Luxembourg requesting information on any rulings granted to Amazon.
Društvo Amazon upotrebljava naziv „LuxOpCo” u svojim zahtjevima za izdavanje rješenja od 23. listopada 2003. i 31. listopada 2003.
As explained by Amazon, even though the contested tax ruling was obtained in 2003, LuxOpCo did not start to use the transfer pricing arrangement endorsed therein for the purposes of determining its annual corporate income tax liability in Luxembourg until 2006.
Društvo Amazon upotrebljava naziv „LuxSCS” u svojim zahtjevima za izdavanje rješenja od 23. listopada 2003. i 31. listopada 2003.
Consequently, there are no fiscal years before 24 June 2004 in which the ruling was used to assess LuxOpCo's annual taxable profit and the Luxembourg tax administration accepted a tax declaration based on that assessment.
U nekoliko navrata razmijenjene su povjerljive informacije koje se ne spominju zasebno u ovom odjeljku.
In any event, the Commission recalls that by letter of 23 December 2004 the Luxembourg tax administration confirmed the continued validity of the transfer pricing arrangement endorsed by the contested tax ruling following a delay in the implementation of the restructuring of Amazon's European operations, for which that ruling was initially requested.
SL C 44, 6.2.2015., str. 30.
All aid granted to LuxOpCo and the Amazon group by way of the contested tax ruling therefore constitutes new aid.
Interni dokumenti društva Amazon: izmijenjeni i preinačeni Ugovor o podijeli troškova i rizika razvoja nematerijalne imovine koji je sklopljen i koji je stupio na snagu 1. siječnja 2005., izmijenjeni i preinačeni Ugovor o podjeli troškova i rizika razvoja nematerijalne imovine koji je sklopljen 2. srpnja 2009. i koji je stupio na snagu 5. siječnja 2009. i prva izmjena izmijenjenog i preinačenog Ugovora o podjeli troškova i rizika razvoja nematerijalne imovine koja je stupila na snagu u veljači 2014. i na snazi je od 1. siječnja 2014.
NO GENERAL PRINCIPLE OF LAW PREVENTS RECOVERY
Uredba Vijeća (EZ) br. 659/1999 od 22. ožujka 1999. o utvrđivanju detaljnih pravila primjene članka 108.
Article 16(1) of Regulation (EU) 2015/1589 provides that the Commission shall not require recovery of the aid if this would be contrary to a general principle of Union law.
Ugovora o funkcioniranju Europske unije (SL L 83, 27.3.1999., str. 1.).
Luxembourg argues that the principles of legal certainty and legitimate expectations stand in the way of recovery in the present case, first, because the Commission is retroactively applying an allegedly new approach to transfer pricing and, second, because the Code of Conduct Group (Business Taxation) and the OECD Forum on Harmful Tax Practices had assured Luxembourg that its tax ruling practice based on Article 164(3) LIR and the Circular is consistent with the OECD Code of Conduct and the OECD TP Guidelines.
Vidjeti uvodnu izjavu 13.
The principle of legal certainty is a general principle of EU law that predicates the predictability of rules and their legal effects.
Društvo Amazon dostavilo je Sporazum o licenciranju 5. ožujka 2015., Prilog 4. (zajedno s kasnijom Izmjenom 1.
According to the case law, the principle of legal certainty prevents the Commission from indefinitely delaying the exercise of its powers.
Sporazuma o licenciranju intelektualnog vlasništva na snazi od 1. siječnja 2009.).
The Court of Justice has also stated that the only grounds on which, in exceptional cases, that principle may be invoked, is when the Commission has manifestly failed to act and has clearly breached its duty of diligence in the exercise of its supervisory powers.
Amazon.com Inc., Godišnje izvješće za 2016., str. 18.
However, when a measure has been granted without having been notified, the mere fact that there has been a delay by the Commission in ordering recovery does not suffice in itself to render that recovery decision unlawful under the legal certainty principle.
Amazon.com Inc., Godišnje izvješće za 2016., str. 3.
In the present case, since the contested tax ruling was never notified to the Commission by Luxembourg, nor otherwise publicly available, the Commission could only have learnt of ts existence when Luxembourg responded to its request for information on 4 August 2014.
Amazon.com Inc., Godišnje izvješće za 2003., str. 5.
The principle of legitimate expectations can be invoked by any person in a situation where an EU authority ‘has caused him to entertain expectations which are justified’.
Izvršenje narudžbe odnosi se na postupak koji se pokreče u trgovačkom društvu u trenutku primitka narudžbe za određeni proizvod.
Important limitations apply to invoking that principle, however, as decided by the Court of Justice.
To uključuje skladištenje, pronalaženje naručenog artikla, pakiranje i otpremu (izravno ili posredstvom trećih osoba).
First, the Court has stated that that principle cannot be invoked unless the person invoking it ‘has been given precise assurances by the administration’.
Amazon.com Inc., Godišnje izvješće za 2002., str. 2.
Second, Member States cannot invoke that principle in cases where they have failed to notify the aid measure to the Commission.
Vidjeti i Izvješće o transfernim cijenama, str. 6. - 7.
Third, the Commission's alleged failure to act is irrelevant when an aid measure has not been notified to it and, consequently, the Commission's silence cannot be interpreted as an implicit authorisation of the measure that may give rise to legitimate expectations.
Sažetak nakon suđenja Amazonu, str. 81, točka.
Consequently, since the Commission never gave precise assurances to Luxembourg that the contested tax ruling does not constitute aid and Luxembourg never notified the contested tax ruling to the Commission, Luxembourg cannot rely on the principle of legitimate expectations.
253.
Luxembourg's subsequent claim that the Commission adopted a novel approach for a finding of State aid to the present case cannot be accepted.
Naziv „web-mjesta EU-a” kako se upotrebljava u ovoj Odluci isključuje www.amazon.nl jer je to web-mjesto pokrenuto nakon promatranog razdoblja iz ove Odluke.
First, in response to an argument made by a Member State that direct taxation fell under its fiscal autonomy, the Court of Justice explicitly acknowledged, in a judgment of 1974, the application of the State aid rules in the field of direct taxation.
Amazon.com Inc., Godišnje izvješće za 2016., str. 3.
Since a tax ruling is no more than an interpretation of the tax rules to a particular situation, upon which a taxpayer may rely to determine its tax burden in a particular Member State, the State aid rules necessarily apply to tax rulings as well, as explicitly acknowledged by the Commission in its 1998 Notice on the application of the State aid rules to measures relating to direct business taxation (‘the 1998 Notice’).
Amazon.com Inc., Godišnje izvješće za 2016., str. 4. i 67.
Second, the Commission adopted a series of decisions in 2002 to 2004 in which it concluded that several tax schemes in various Member States constituted State aid because they endorsed a method of assessment of taxable income for certain categories of undertaking that departed from a reliable approximation of an arm's length outcome or otherwise benefitted certain multinational group companies under the ordinary rules of corporate taxation.
Naziv „lokalna povezana društva u EU-u” kako se upotrebljava u ovoj Odluci uključuje Amazon.co.uk Ltd., Amazon.fr SARL, Amazon.fr Logistique SAS, Amazon.de GmbH i Amazon Logistik GmbH koji su bili lokalna povezana društva u EU-u od 1. svibnja 2006.
That a method of assessment of taxable income producing an outcome that diverges from the arm's length principle results in the grant of State aid for its beneficiary/-ies was explicitly endorsed by the Court of Justice in a 2006 judgment.
Izvješće o transfernim cijenama, str. 12.
Luxembourg further submits that it was explicitly confirmed at the Council (ECOFIN) meeting of 27 May 2011 that, in view of the adoption of the Circulars, Luxembourg's tax ruling practice should not be evaluated according to the Code of Conduct Group and that an agreement in a Code of Conduct Group meeting that ‘there [is] no need for the [Luxembourg tax measure on companies engaged in intra-group financing activities] to be assessed against the criteria of the Code of Conduct’ constitutes a precise assurance as to appropriateness of the general tax ruling practice of Luxembourg.
Podnesak društva Amazon od 5. ožujka 2015.: Prilog 6.
However, those submissions cannot be accepted as substantiating a claim of either legal certainty or legitimate expectations.
Izvješće o transfernim cijenama, str. 13.: „Od datuma restrukturiranja glavne djelatnosti društva LuxSCS bit će ograničene na djelatnosti holding društva za nematerijalnu imovinu i sudionika u tekućem razvoju nematerijalne imovine preko CSA-a.
First, the Code of Conduct and the State aid rules pursue different objectives: while the Code of Conduct aims at tackling harmful tax competition between Member States, the State aid rules seek to address distortions of competition that result from favourable treatment by Member States, also in the form of tax reductions, of certain undertakings.
Nadalje, društvo LuxSCS licencirat će nematerijalnu imovinu društvu LuxOpCo na temelju licencije za nematerijalnu imovinu i zaprimat će tantijeme u skladu s tom licencijom.”
Second, the Code of Conduct is not a legally binding instrument.
Dopis društva Amazon luksemburškoj poreznoj upravi od 20. travnja 2006. (koje je sastavio porezni savjetnik društva Amazon [Savjetnik 1.]), str. 2.: „Društvo EHT [LuxSCS], neizravno ovisno društvo u potpunom vlasništvu društva Amazon.com Inc, osnovano je za potrebe držanja i razvoja intelektualnog vlasništva (samo na temelju financijskog doprinosa). […] Djelatnost EHT-a [LuxSCS] ograničena je na djelatnost čistog holdinga za intelektualno vlasništvo Amazona u EU-u, dionice u AEU-u i to je društvo sklopilo ograničeni broj pravnih sporazuma koji su nužni za rad luksemburške strukture (kako je opisano pod točkom 1.2. u nastavku).
It is a forum of discussion for Member States on measures which have, or may have, a significant impact on the location of businesses within the Union.
EHT [LuxSCS] će od svojih ovisnih društava primati samo pasivne prihode (kamate i tantijeme).”
While the Code of Conduct group enjoys a certain margin of discretion, the Commission enjoys no discretion in determining whether a tax measure falls to be considered State aid, since that notion is an objective one.
U točki 1.2 ovog dopisa opisuju se sporazumi opisani u uvodnoj izjavi 105. ove Odluke.
Third, the Code of Conduct was adopted by the Council (ECOFIN), not the Commission, and therefore cannot bind the Commission in the exercise of its State aid competence.
Još jedno društvo u grupi kojem je društvo LuxSCS osiguralo ograničeno financiranje bilo je društvo Amazon Eurasia Holding Sarl ([20-30] milijuna EUR 2013.).
Fourth, the Code of Conduct considered the Circulars on intra-group financing in general, whereas this Decision examines a specific tax ruling granted in favour of a specific company not related to intra-group financing.
Sporazum o licenciranju postojećeg intelektualnog vlasništva i Sporazum o prijenosu postojećeg intelektualnog vlasništva između društava LuxSCS i ATI od 1. siječnja 2005.
Consequently, an agreement in the Code of Conduct Group meeting can neither bind nor restrict the Commission's actions in exercising its powers which are conferred on it by the Treaty in the field of State aid.
U skladu sa stavkom 1.8. ugovora o podijeli troškova „Izvedeno djelo” znači „sva nova djela koja je stvorila jedna stranka ili koja su stvorena za jednu stranku iz postojećeg materijala koji je sadržan u intelektualnom vlasništvu druge stranke ili je rezultat pristupa tom intelektualnom vlasništvu ili njegove uporabe […]”.
The same is true for the agreements reached on 6 December 2011 in the OECD Forum, according to which ‘the following 10 regimes did not need to be examined further […] Luxembourg – Advance tax analysis for intra-group financing’.
Ugovor o podijeli troškova, odjeljak 6.
The OECD is not a Union institution, nor is the Union a member of that organisation, and its conclusions, which are non-binding, cannot bind the institutions of the Union.
(Licencija i vlasništvo) Kako je navedeno u stavku 6.4.
Moreover, far from giving a precise assurance, the OECD Forum refrained from further examining the Luxembourg tax analysis for intra-group financing.
Ugovora o podijeli troškova, društvo LuxSCS zadržalo je, osim licencija za nematerijalnu imovinu koje su mu izdala društva A9 i ATI u skladu s CSA-om, pravo i vlasništvo nad svom nematerijalnom imovinom koja mu je doprinesena.
It is therefore impossible to draw any kind of conclusions or inferences from this statement as regards the application of the State aid rules to the contested tax ruling, which is an individual transfer pricing ruling unrelated to intra-group financing.
Ugovor o podjeli troškova, stavak 1.13. o „Licenciranoj svrsi”.
Amazon similarly invokes the principle of legitimate expectations, arguing that the Commission's investigation was based on a novel approach to the State aid rules.
Ugovor o podjeli troškova, odjeljak 4. „Raspodjela troškova razvoja” i odjeljak 5. „Plaćanja”.
The Commission has already explained in Recital 626 why that claim is unfounded.
Ugovor o podjeli troškova, stavak 9.12.
This means that the legitimate expectation must arise from a previous behaviour of the Commission that, for instance, had already adopted a decision on the same or identical aid scheme.
Kako je objašnjeno u odjeljku 1.1.
Amazon did not refer to any such acts of the Commission, but instead claimed that ‘the application of State aid rules to individual tax rulings on transfer pricing has never been subject of any previous statement by the Commission’.
Ugovora o podjeli troškova, doprinos prava intelektualnog vlasništva društva A9 Ugovoru o podijeli troškova ograničen je na prava intelektualnog vlasništva koja su u vlasništvu društva A9 ili ih ono drži u pogledu tehnologije pretraživanja i pregledavanja u okviru e-trgovine.
The Commission recalls in this regard that State aid is an objective notion, so that even if no decisions existed prior to 2015 that declared individual tax rulings as giving rise to State aid, that does not mean that such rulings cannot give rise to State aid.
To uključuje tehnologiju za Amazonovu platformu računalne podrške, izgled stranica u EU-u, kataloge, funkcije pretraživanja i pregledavanja, logistički postupak, obradu narudžbi, pomoć korisnicima i funkcije prilagodbe.
In any event, the Commission has adopted a number of decisions declaring schemes deviating from the arm's length principle as giving rise to State aid and it has adopted a number of decisions declaring individual tax measures to constitute State aid.
Za više pojedinosti vidjeti uvodnu izjavu 174. i dalje.
Amazon also invokes the principle of equal treatment, arguing that Amazon would be the only undertaking of many subject to the same tax treatment which would have to repay illegal aid.
Kako je objašnjeno u podnesku društva Amazon od 21. kolovoza 2015. društvo LuxSCS preuzelo je pravno vlasništvo nad podacima o europskim potrošačima koje su prikupila društva Amazon Int'l Dales, inc. i Amazon Int'l Marketplace, u okviru restrukturiranja poslovanja u Europi.
However, the Court has already considered that the fact that other undertakings are granted State aid, even competitors, is irrelevant for determining whether a particular measure constitutes State aid.
Bazu podataka kupaca dalje je razvijao i održavao LuxOpCo.
Since recovery is the logical consequence of the existence of unlawful aid, this must a fortiori apply to the repayment of the unlawful State aid.
To uključuje žig, robnu marku, stil, logotip, predstavljanje Amazona i povezanu nematerijalnu imovinu.
In conclusion, no general principle of law prevents recovery in the present case.
U Ugovoru o podjeli troškova, stavcima 1.1., 1.4. i 1.11. predviđeno je sljedeće: „Neovisno o navedenom, stranke se izričito slažu da […][nematerijalna imovina] ne uključuje nazive internetskih domena.”
METHODOLOGY FOR RECOVERY
Kako je objašnjeno u podnesku društva Amazon od 12. lipnja 2015., društvo LuxSCS prenijelo je dionice u društvu LuxOpCo na društvo Amazon Europe Core S.à r.l. dana 16. prosinca 2013.
The obligation on a State to abolish unlawful aid regarded by the Commission as being incompatible with the internal market is designed to re-establish the previously existing competitive situation on the market.
Izvješće o transfernim cijenama, str. 30.
In this context, the Court of Justice has stated that that objective is attained once the recipient has repaid the amounts granted by way of unlawful aid, thus forfeiting the advantage which it has enjoyed over its competitors on the market, and the situation prior to the payment of the aid is restored.
Podnesak društva Amazon od 5. ožujka 2015., odjeljak 6. i unutarnji dokument društva Amazon: Dopis društva Amazon luksemburškoj poreznoj upravi od 14. travnja 2006., str. 2.
Rather, it is sufficient for the Commission's decision to include information enabling the addressee of the decision to work out that amount itself without overmuch difficulty .
Glavni prodavatelj jest subjekt koji je vlasnik robe koja se prodaje i koji ju nudi na prodaju te koji je odgovoran za ubiranje i plaćanje poreza na dodanu vrijednost.
Union law merely requires recovery of unlawful aid to restore the position to the status quo ante and that repayment be made in accordance with the rules of national law.
Parlament Ujedinjene Kraljevine, Donji Dom: Izvješće o financijskim izvještajima HRMC-a za 2011. – 2012. – Pisani dokazi od društva Amazon EU Sarl koje je izradio Andrew Cecil (Direktor za javnu politiku EU-a, LuxOpCo, Luksemburg), 13. studenoga 2012.: „Društvo Amazon EU Sarl vlasnik je inventara, zarađuje dobit povezanu s prodajom tih proizvoda krajnjim kupcima i snosi rizik od gubitka.
In relation to unlawful State aid in the form of tax measures, the amount to be recovered should be calculated on the basis of a comparison between the tax actually paid and the amount which should have been paid if the generally applicable rule had been applied.
Dostupno na: https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201213/cmselect/cmpubacc/writev/716/m03.htm.
As concluded in Recital 542, the remuneration paid from LuxOpCo to LuxSCS should be determined on the basis of a TNMM whereby LuxSCS is considered as the less complex entity to the License Agreement and the remuneration to be paid by LuxOpCo to LuxSCS should be determined with reference to LuxSCS as the tested party.
Podnesak društva Amazon od 22. ožujka 2016., odjeljak 1.– 2. i njegov dokaz E.