natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
5 According to the Finanzgericht, the interpretation of Paragraph 15(a) of the UStG whereby capital goods which have initially been put to private use by a taxable person and then, in subsequent years, to business use qualify for no VAT deduction whatsoever raises certain doubts with respect to the Sixth Directive, since the latter does not exclude the right to such a deduction. 
5 Prema tvrdnji Finanzgerichta (Financijski sud), tumačenje članka 15. točke (a) UStG-a, prema kojem kapitalna dobra koja je porezni obveznik u početku upotrebljavao za privatne potrebe, a potom u narednim godinama za poslovne potrebe, uopće ne ispunjavaju uvjete za odbitak PDV-a pobuđuje sumnje u vezi sa Šestom direktivom, jer ta direktiva ne isključuje pravo na odbitak te vrste.
The national court therefore decided to stay the proceedings before it and refer the following questions to the Court for a preliminary ruling: 
Nacionalni sud stoga je odlučio prekinuti postupak i postaviti Sudu sljedeća prethodna pitanja:
"1. Is Article 20(2) of the Sixth Directive applicable to all capital goods which 
„1. Primjenjuje li se članak 20. stavak 2. Šeste direktive na sva kapitalna dobra:
(a) were supplied by one taxable person to another taxable person and at some point within a period of five years, including the year in which the goods were acquired, are used by the recipient for the purposes of his taxable transactions, 
(a) koja je jedan porezni obveznik isporučio drugom poreznom obvezniku i koja primatelj u nekom trenutku tijekom razdoblja od pet godina, uključujući godinu u kojoj su nabavljena, upotrebljava u svrhu svojih oporezivih transakcija,
or is it also necessary for the capital goods in question to have been 
ili je također nužno da su kapitalna dobra o kojima je riječ:
(b) used from the time of acquisition for the purposes of the taxable or exempted transactions (business purposes) of the taxable person, or 
(b) od trenutka nabave upotrebljavana u svrhu oporezivih transakcija ili transakcija oslobođenih poreza (u poslovne svrhe) poreznog obveznika, ili
(c) applied at the time of acquisition for the purposes of the business of the taxable person? 
(c) u trenutku nabave bila namijenjena za poslovne svrhe poreznog obveznika?
2. If alternative (b) is correct: 
2. Ako je odgovor na prvo pitanje pod (b) potvrdan,
Does the application of Article 20(2) of the Sixth Directive to capital goods which are used by a taxable person both for business purposes and for other, in particular private, purposes (mixed use) depend on their having been used to a specific minimum extent for business purposes in the year in which they were acquired and, if so, how is that minimum to be defined? 
ovisi li primjena članka 20. stavka 2. Šeste direktive na kapitalna dobra koja porezni obveznik upotrebljava i u poslovne i u druge, osobito osobne svrhe (mješovita uporaba), o tome jesu li ta dobra upotrebljavana u poslovne svrhe u određenom minimalnom opsegu u godini u kojoj su nabavljena; ako ovisi, na koji se način određuje taj minimum?
3. If alternative (c) is correct: 
3. Ako je odgovor na prvo pitanje pod (c) potvrdan,
Is the application of the capital goods a matter for the taxable person' s discretion or does it presuppose that the taxable person 
može li porezni obveznik slobodno odlučiti o namjeni kapitalnih dobara ili se pretpostavlja:
(a) acquires them with the intention of using them for business purposes and, if so, must that use be intended to begin 
(a) da ih porezni obveznik nabavlja s namjerom uporabe u poslovne svrhe; ako je tako, mora li namjeravana uporaba započeti
immediately from the time of acquisition, or 
od trenutka nabave, ili
from some point within the year of acquisition, or 
od nekog trenutka tijekom prve godine od nabave, ili
from some point before the expiry of a period of five years, including the year of acquisition? 
od nekog trenutka prije isteka razdoblja od pet godina, uključujući godinu nabave?
(b) actually uses the capital goods for business purposes and, if so, does it matter whether such use begins 
(b) da ih porezni obveznik doista upotrebljava u poslovne svrhe; ako je tako, je li važno započinje li ta uporaba
from the time of acquisition, or 
od trenutka nabave, ili
within the year in which the capital goods were acquired, or 
unutar razdoblja od godine dana od trenutka nabave, ili
within the period of five years, including the year in which the goods were acquired? 
unutar razdoblja od pet godina, uključujući godinu nabave?
As far as Questions 3(a) and (b) are concerned: 
Što se tiče trećeg pitanja pod (a) i (b):
Where the capital goods are used for mixed purposes, must the intended use or actual use (or both) for business purposes attain a specific minimum proportion and, if so, how is that minimum to be defined?" 
Ako se kapitalna dobra upotrebljavaju u mješovite svrhe, mora li namjeravana uporaba ili stvarna uporaba (ili obje) u poslovne svrhe doseći određeni minimalni opseg i ako mora, kako se određuje taj minimum?"
6 Reference is made to the Report for the Hearing for a fuller account of the legal background and of the circumstances of the case before the national court, the procedure and the written observations submitted to the Court, which are mentioned or discussed hereinafter only so far as is necessary for the reasoning of the Court. 
6 Za potpuniji prikaz pravnog okvira i okolnosti postupka pred nacionalnim sudom te postupka i pisanih očitovanja podnesenih Sudu upućuje se na izvještaj za raspravu. Ti dijelovi spisa u nastavku se spominju ili razmatraju samo u mjeri u kojoj je to potrebno za obrazloženje odluke Suda.
The scope of Article 20(2) of the Sixth Directive (first question) 
Područje primjene članka 20. stavka 2. Šeste direktive (prvo pitanje)
7 The purpose of the first part of this question is, essentially, to determine whether the rules for the adjustment of input tax laid down in Article 20(2) of the Sixth Directive apply where a taxable person initially acquires goods wholly for private use but later uses them for business purposes during the five-year adjustment period. 
7 Svrha prvog dijela prvog pitanja u biti je utvrditi primjenjuju li se pravila za ispravak ulaznog poreza propisana člankom 20. stavkom 2. Šeste direktive ako je porezni obveznik isprva nabavio dobra isključivo za osobne potrebe, ali ih poslije, tijekom petogodišnjeg razdoblja ispravka, upotrebljava za poslovne potrebe.
In the second part, the Court is asked whether it is sufficient, for the application of Article 20(2), for a person to acquire goods as a taxable person or whether there must be immediate use of the goods for the purposes of economic activities within the meaning of Article 4 of the Sixth Directive. 
U drugom dijelu od Suda se traži odgovor na pitanje je li za primjenu članka 20. stavka 2. dovoljno da osoba nabavi dobra u svojstvu poreznog obveznika ili mora odmah početi upotrebljavati ta dobra za gospodarsku aktivnost u smislu članka 4.
The first part of the first question 
Šeste direktive. Prvi dio prvog pitanja
8 Pursuant to Article 17(1) of the Sixth Directive, which is entitled "Origin and scope of the right to deduct", the right to deduct arises at the time when the deductible tax becomes chargeable. 
8 U skladu s člankom 17. stavkom 1. Šeste direktive, koji je naslovljen „Porijeklo i opseg prava na odbitak" [neslužbeni prijevod], pravo na odbitak nastaje u trenutku kada nastaje obveza obračuna poreza koji se može odbiti.
Consequently, only the capacity in which a person is acting at that time can determine the existence of the right to deduct. 
Slijedom toga, postojanje prava na odbitak može se odrediti samo na temelju svojstva osobe u tom trenutku.
By virtue of Article 17(2), in so far as a taxable person, acting as such, uses the goods for the purposes of his taxable transactions, he is entitled to deduct the tax due or paid in respect of those goods. 
U skladu s člankom 17. stavkom 2., ako porezni obveznik u tom svojstvu upotrebljava dobra u svrhu svojih oporezovanih transakcija, on ima pravo odbiti porez koji je dužan platiti ili koji je platio na ta dobra.
9 Conversely, where the goods are not used for the taxable person' s economic activities within the meaning of Article 4 but are used by him for his private consumption, no right to deduct can arise. 
9 Suprotno tomu, ako se dobra ne upotrebljavaju za gospodarske aktivnosti poreznog obveznika u smislu članka 4. nego ih on upotrebljava za osobnu potrošnju, pravo na odbitak ne može se ostvariti.
10 Moreover, where a taxable person acquires goods in his private capacity, he does not meet the administrative and accounting requirements governing the exercise of the right to deduct provided for in Articles 18 and 22 of the Sixth Directive. 
10 Osim toga, ako porezni obveznik nabavi dobra u privatne svrhe, on ne ispunjava administrativne i računovodstvene zahtjeve kojima se uređuje pravo na odbitak iz članaka 18. i 22. Šeste direktive.
11 The very wording of paragraph 2 of Article 20, which is entitled "Adjustments of deductions", confirms that interpretation. 
11 Sam tekst stavka 2. članka 20., koji je naslovljen „Ispravci odbitaka" [neslužbeni prijevod], potvrđuje to tumačenje.
That article contains no provision concerning the origin of any right to deduct. 
Taj članak ne sadržava nijednu odredbu o porijeklu prava na odbitak.
Since it does no more than refer to adjustments of deductions provided for in respect of capital goods it must be concluded that the origin of the right to make such deductions is dealt with in other provisions of the Sixth Directive. 
Budući da se u njemu samo upućuje na ispravke odbitaka u odnosu na kapitalna dobra, valja zaključiti da se porijeklom prava na takve odbitke bave druge odredbe Šeste direktive.
12 It is apparent from the scheme of the Sixth Directive and from the actual wording of Article 20(2) that the latter provision does no more than establish the procedure for calculating the adjustments to the initial deduction. 
12 Iz sustava Šeste direktive i iz teksta članka 20. stavka 2. proizlazi da se potonjom odredbom samo utvrđuje postupak izračuna ispravaka početnih odbitaka.
It cannot therefore give rise to any right to deduct or convert the tax paid by a taxable person in respect of his non-taxable transactions into a tax that is deductible within the meaning of Article 17. 
Iz te odredbe stoga ne može proizaći pravo poreznog obveznika na odbitak ili na pretvorbu poreza koji je platio za neoporezive transakcije u porez koji se može odbiti u smislu članka 17.
The second part of the first question 
Drugi dio prvog pitanja
13 In order to answer the second part of the first question, it must be borne in mind that, according to the judgment of the Court in Case 268/83 Rompelman v Minister van Financiën [1985] ECR 655, paragraph 22, the economic activities referred to in Article 4(1) may consist in several consecutive transactions, as is indeed suggested by the wording of Article 4(2). 
13 Kako bi se odgovorilo na drugi dio prvog pitanja valja imati na umu da se, u skladu s presudom Suda od 14. veljače 1985., Rompelman (C-268/83, Zb., str. 655., t. 22.), gospodarske aktivnosti iz članka 4. stavka 1. Šeste direktive mogu sastojati od nekoliko uzastopnih transakcija, kao što doista sugerira tekst članka 4. stavka 2. Šeste direktive.
Amongst such transactions preparatory activities, such as the acquisition of operating assets, must be treated as constituting economic activities within the meaning of that article. 
Među takvim aktivnostima pripremne se aktivnosti, kao što je nabava sredstava za rad, moraju smatrati gospodarskim aktivnostima u smislu tog članka.
14 It follows from that judgment that a person who acquires goods for the purposes of an economic activity within the meaning of Article 4 does so as a taxable person, even if the goods are not used immediately for such economic activities. 
14 Iz te presude proizlazi da osoba koja nabavi dobra u svrhu gospodarske aktivnosti u smislu članka 4. to čini u svojstvu poreznog obveznika, čak i ako ta dobra ne upotrebljava smjesta za tu gospodarsku aktivnost.
15 Consequently, it is the acquisition of the goods by a taxable person acting as such that gives rise to the application of the VAT system and therefore of the deduction mechanism. 
15 Slijedom toga, primjena sustava PDV-a te time i mehanizma odbitaka proizlazi iz činjenice da je osoba nabavila dobra u svojstvu poreznog obveznika.
The use to which the goods are put, or intended to be put, merely determines the extent of the initial deduction to which the taxable person is entitled under Article 17 and the extent of any adjustments in the course of the following periods. 
Svrha za koju se ta dobra upotrebljavaju ili se namjeravaju upotrijebiti određuje samo opseg početnog odbitka na koji porezni obveznik ima pravo na temelju članka 17. i opseg možebitnih ispravaka tijekom narednih razdoblja.
16 It follows that the immediate use of the goods for taxable or exempt supplies does not in itself constitute a condition for the application of Article 20(2). 
16 Iz toga slijedi da trenutačna uporaba dobara za isporuke koje su oporezive ili oslobođene poreza sama po sebi nije uvjet za primjenu članka 20. stavka 2.
17 It must therefore be stated in reply to Question 1 as a whole that Article 20(2) of the Sixth Directive applies where a person acquires capital goods in his capacity as a taxable person and allocates them to his economic activity within the meaning of Article 4 of the Sixth Directive. 
17 Stoga u odgovoru na prvo pitanje u cjelini valja navesti da se članak 20. stavak 2. Šeste direktive primjenjuje kada osoba nabavlja kapitalna dobra u svojstvu poreznog obveznika te ih namjenjuje svojoj gospodarskoj aktivnosti u smislu članka 4. Šeste direktive.
Minimal use of capital goods (Question 2) 
Minimalna uporaba kapitalnih dobara (drugo pitanje)
18 In view of the answer given to the first question, it is unnecessary to consider the second question. 
18 S obzirom na odgovor na prvo pitanje nije potrebno razmatrati drugo pitanje.
The criteria to be used in determining whether a person acquires goods in his capacity as a taxable person (Questions 3(a) and (b) ) 
Kriteriji s pomoću kojih se određuje nabavlja li osoba dobra u svojstvu poreznog obveznika (treće pitanje pod (a) i (b))
19 In the first two parts of its third question, the national court essentially seeks clarification as to the criteria to be used in determining whether a person acquires goods in his capacity as a taxable person where they are not allocated immediately to his economic activities. 
19 U prva dva dijela trećeg pitanja nacionalni sud u biti traži razjašnjenje kriterija s pomoću kojih se određuje nabavlja li osoba dobra u svojstvu poreznog obveznika ako ta dobra nisu odmah namijenjena gospodarskoj aktivnosti te osobe.
20 The answer to that question depends on an assessment of all the relevant circumstances, inter alia the nature of the goods concerned and the period which elapsed between their acquisition and their use for the taxable person' s economic activities. 
20 Odgovor na to pitanje ovisi o procjeni svih relevantnih okolnosti, među ostalim prirode dobara o kojima je riječ i razdoblja koje je proteklo između njihove nabave i uporabe za gospodarske aktivnosti poreznog obveznika.
However, the adjustment periods provided for in Article 20(2) of the Sixth Directive do not as such have any bearing on the question whether the goods are acquired for the purposes of those economic activities. 
Međutim, razdoblja ispravka propisana člankom 20. stavkom 2. Šeste direktive kao takva nemaju nikakve veze s pitanjem jesu li dobra nabavljena u svrhu tih gospodarskih aktivnosti.
21 It must therefore be stated in reply to the first two parts of the third question that whether, in a particular case, a taxable person has acquired goods for the purposes of his economic activity within the meaning of Article 4 of the Sixth Directive is a question of fact which must be determined in the light of all the circumstances of the case, including the nature of the goods concerned and the period between the acquisition of the goods and their use for the purposes of the taxable person' s economic activity. 
21 Stoga na prva dva dijela trećeg pitanja valja odgovoriti da je pitanje o tome je li u određenom slučaju porezni obveznik nabavio dobra u svrhu svoje gospodarske aktivnosti u smislu članka 4. Šeste direktive zapravo pitanje činjenica koje valja utvrditi s obzirom na sve okolnosti predmeta, uključujući prirodu dobara o kojima je riječ i razdoblje koje je proteklo između njihove nabave i uporabe za gospodarske aktivnosti poreznog obveznika.
The validity of a rule imposing a restriction on the right to deduct VAT (Question 3(c) ) 
Valjanost pravila kojim se ograničava pravo na odbitak PDV-a (treće pitanje pod (c))
22 In the last part of the third question, the national court asks essentially whether, under the Sixth Directive, a person who acquires goods as a taxable person and has the right to deduct input tax in respect of such goods may do so even where, upon acquisition and for some time thereafter, he makes relatively little use of them for the purposes of economic activities. 
22 U posljednjem dijelu trećeg pitanja nacionalni sud u biti pita može li, u skladu sa Šestom direktivom, osoba koja nabavlja dobra kao porezni obveznik i koja ima pravo odbiti ulazni porez za ta dobra to učiniti i ako ih neko vrijeme nakon trenutka nabave relativno malo upotrebljava u svrhu gospodarskih aktivnosti.
23 At the hearing, the German Government maintained that the dispute pending before the national court was limited to the question whether Mr Lennartz was entitled to make adjustments under Article 20(2) of the Sixth Directive. 
23 Njemačka vlada izjavila je na raspravi da je spor pred nacionalnim sudom ograničen na pitanje ima li H. Lennartz pravo na ispravke u skladu s člankom 20. stavkom 2. Šeste direktive.
Since he did not apply for an initial deduction under Article 17(2) for 1985, the classification adopted for that year became final. 
Budući da nije podnio zahtjev za početni odbitak za 1985. u skladu s člankom 17. stavkom 2., kvalifikacija priznata za tu godinu postala je konačna.
Consequently, in its view, the answer to the questions submitted should be based on the premise that Mr Lennartz had no right to make any deduction in respect of the purchase of the car. 
Stoga prema mišljenju njemačke vlade odgovor na upućena pitanja treba temeljiti na premisi da H. Lennartz nije uopće imao pravo na odbitak povodom kupnje automobila.
24 The order for reference appears to support the German Government' s contention. 
24 Čini se da zahtjev za prethodnu odluku potvrđuje tu tvrdnju njemačke vlade.
Furthermore, the latter rightly considers that the limit applies to Mr Lennartz' s right to an initial deduction for 1985 under Article 17(2). 
Nadalje, njemačka vlada s pravom smatra da se takvo ograničenje primjenjuje na pravo H. Lennartza na početni odbitak za 1985. u skladu s člankom 17. stavkom 2.
Consequently, in the event of the rule in question not being valid, Mr Lennartz could not rely on it unless he were able to make a retroactive application for an initial deduction under Article 17(2) pursuant to the German legislation adopted pursuant to Article 18(3) of the Sixth Directive. 
Slijedom toga, ako pravilo o kojem je riječ nije valjano, H. Lennartz nije se mogao pozvati na njega, osim u slučaju da je zahtjev za početni odbitak na temelju članka 17. stavka 2. mogao podnijeti retroaktivno, u skladu s njemačkim zakonodavstvom donesenim na temelju članka 18. stavka 3. Šeste direktive.
25 Nevertheless, since the national court expressly raises the question of the requirement that use should attain a specific minimum proportion, it is necessary to consider whether the measure in question may lead to refusal of the right of deduction in cases of actual, but limited, use of the capital goods for the purposes of a taxable person' s economic activities. 
25 Ipak, s obzirom na to da nacionalni sud izričito postavlja pitanje o uvjetu minimalnog opsega uporabe, potrebno je razmotriti može li mjera o kojoj je riječ dovesti do uskraćivanja prava na odbitak u slučaju stvarne, ali ograničene, uporabe kapitalnih dobara u svrhu gospodarskih aktivnosti poreznog obveznika.
26 In reply to the national court' s question, it must be emphasized in the first place that, pursuant to Article 6 of the Sixth Directive, the use of capital goods for the private use of a taxable person or for purposes other than those of his business, where the VAT on such goods is wholly or partly deductible, is treated as a supply of services for consideration. 
26 Pri odgovaranju na pitanje nacionalnog suda prije svega valja istaknuti da se, u skladu s člankom 6. Šeste direktive prema uporabi kapitalnih dobara za osobne potrebe poreznog obveznika ili u svrhe koje nisu povezane s njegovim poslovanjem, ako se PDV na takva dobra može u potpunosti ili djelomično odbiti, odnosi kao prema isporuci usluga uz naknadu.
It is apparent from the combined provisions of Article 6(2)(a) and of Article 11A(1)(c) that, where a taxable person acquires goods which he employs partly for private use, he is deemed to effect for consideration a supply of services taxed on the basis of the cost of providing the services. 
Iz odredaba članka 6. stavka 2. točke (a) u vezi s odredbama članka 11. dijela A stavka 1. točke (c) proizlazi da ako porezni obveznik nabavlja dobra kojima se djelomično služi za osobne potrebe, smatra se da izvršava isporuku uz naknadu usluga koje se oporezuju na temelju troška pružanja usluga.
Consequently, a person who uses goods partly for the purposes of taxable business transactions and partly for private use and who, upon acquiring the goods, recovered all or part of the input VAT, is deemed to use the goods entirely for the purposes of his taxable transactions within the meaning of Article 17(2). 
Slijedom toga, ako osoba upotrebljava dobra djelomično u svrhu oporezivih poslovnih transakcija, a djelomično za osobne potrebe i ako je nakon nabave dobara dobila povrat ulaznog PDV-a u cijelosti ili djelomično, smatra se da upotrebljava ta dobra u cijelosti u svrhu svojih oporezivih transakcija u smislu članka 17. stavka 2.
Consequently, such a person is in principle entitled to a right of total and immediate deduction of the input tax paid on purchasing the goods. 
Slijedom toga, ta osoba u načelu ima pravo na ukupan i trenutačan odbitak ulaznog poreza koji je platila na kupnju dobara.
27 The provisions concerning the apportionment of input tax contained in Article 17(5) concern only the adjustment after the initial deduction. 
27 Odredbe koje se tiču raspodjele ulaznog poreza sadržane u članku 17. stavku 5. odnose se samo na ispravak nakon početnog odbitka.
As the Court observed in its judgment in Case 50/87 Commission v France [1988] ECR 4797, paragraphs 16 and 17, it is apparent from the scheme of the Sixth Directive, and in particular from Articles 4 and 17, that in the absence of any provision empowering the Member States to limit the right of deduction granted to taxable persons, that right must be exercised immediately in respect of all the taxes charged on transactions relating to inputs. 
Kao što je Sud naveo u presudi od 21. rujna 1988., Komisija/Francuska (C-50/87, Zb., str. 4797., t. 16. i 17.), iz sustava Šeste direktive, a posebno iz članaka 4. i 17., jasno proizlazi da se u nedostatku odredaba kojima se državama članicama odobrava ograničenje prava na odbitak koje se dodjeljuje poreznim obveznicima to pravo odmah mora ostvariti u pogledu svih poreza naplaćenih na ulazne transakcije.
Such limitations on the right of deduction must be applied in a similar manner in all the Member States and therefore derogations are permitted only in the cases expressly provided for in the directive. 
Sve države članice moraju na sličan način primjenjivati ograničenja prava na odbitak te su stoga odstupanja dopuštena samo u slučajevima koji su izričito navedeni u Direktivi.