natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Whilst it may be true that EC law applies to Gibraltar by virtue of Article 299(4) of the EC Treaty rather than Article 299(1), that fact does not afford Gibraltar special status for the purposes of the application of the rules on State aid in general and on regional State aid in particular.
Čeprav je mogoče res, da pravo ES velja za Gibraltar zaradi člena 299(4) Pogodbe ES, ne pa člena 299(1), to dejstvo Gibraltarju ne omogoča posebnega položaja za uporabo pravil o državni pomoči v splošnem, zlasti regionalne državne pomoči.
Paragraphs 1, 2 and 4 of Article 299 all provide that the provisions of the Treaty shall apply and no difference can be detected between the legal regime of the different territories enumerated in each paragraph, subject to specific and express derogations.
Odstavki 1, 2 in 4 člena 299 vsi zagotavljajo, da določbe Pogodbe veljajo in med pravnimi režimi različnih ozemelj, naštetimi v vsakem odstavku, za katere veljajo določena in izključna odstopanja, ni mogoče zaznati razlik.
As explained above, the Act of Accession does not exclude Gibraltar from the application of State aid rules.
Kot je razloženo zgoraj, Akt o pristopu ne izključuje Gibraltarja iz uporabe pravil o državni pomoči.
The way in which EU law is given effect in Gibraltar, including the transposition of directives and the establishment of competent authorities, is not relevant for the purposes of establishing whether or not the reform constitutes State aid.
Način, kako pravo EU velja v Gibraltarju, vključno s prenosom direktiv in vzpostavitvijo pristojnih oblasti, ni pomemben za ugotavljanje, ali reforma predstavlja državno pomoč ali ne.
The manner in which a Member State gives effect to EU law is purely matter of the internal division of competences within the State.
Način, kako država članica uveljavlja pravo EU je izključno stvar notranje delitve pristojnosti znotraj države.
The fact that a measure is adopted at a sub-national level does not in any way affect the application of Article 87 of the EC Treaty [33].
Dejstvo, da je ukrep sprejet na poddržavnem nivoju, na noben način ne vpliva na uporabo člena 87 Pogodbe ES [33].
Finally, the fact that the budget of a given territory is self-sufficient is not immediately relevant for the assessment under State aid rules of the measures adopted by the authorities of that territory.
Končno, dejstvo, da je proračun danega ozemlja samozadosten, ni neposredno pomembno za ocenitev ukrepov, ki so jih sprejele oblasti tega ozemlja, v okviru državne pomoči.
Such an assessment must be based on the effects of the measures for the benefiting undertakings and not on the situation of the granting authority.
Takšna ocena mora temeljiti na učinkih, ki jih ima ukrep za upravičena podjetja, in ne na stanju organa, ki ukrep odobri.
In particular, a small territory like Gibraltar may well become self-sufficient precisely as a result of its ability to apply lower taxes and to attract business, in particular off-shore activities.
Zlasti majhna ozemlja, kot je Gibraltar, lahko postanejo samozadostna natančno zaradi svoje zmožnosti, da uporabljajo nižje davke in privlačijo podjetja, še posebej priobalne dejavnosti.
In any event, it is common ground that Gibraltar depends on the United Kingdom, inter alia, for its foreign policy, including membership of the European Union, for its defence and for its monetary policy.
Splošno pa je znano, da je Gibraltar od Združenega kraljestva odvisen glede, med drugim, svoje zunanje politike, vključno s članstvom v Evropski uniji, svoje obrambe in glede monetarne politike.
It thus benefits from a number of services provided by the United Kingdom.
Zato ima koristi od številnih storitev, ki jih zagotavlja Združeno kraljestvo.
In addition, it appears from the institutional arrangements in place that financial responsibility for Gibraltar falls in the last resort to the United Kingdom.
Iz veljavne institucionalne ureditve se tudi zdi, da finančna odgovornost za Gibraltar v končni fazi pade na Združeno kraljestvo.
As for the Åland Executive's comments to the effect that a general tax measure within a self-governing region is not selective, they rely on similar arguments to those advanced by the United Kingdom and the Government of Gibraltar.
Kar se tiče pripomb Alandskega izvršilnega organa, da splošni davčni ukrep znotraj regije s samostojno upravo ni selektiven, se tudi oni zanašajo na podobne argumente, kot sta jih predstavila Združeno kraljestvo in gibraltarska vlada.
The Commission refers to its reasoning developed above, and in particular in paragraphs 104 to 109.
Komisija se sklicuje na argumente, ki jih je razvila zgoraj, zlasti v odstavkih 104 do 109.
The Commission further notes that in the case of Åland Islands captive insurance companies it was able to establish the material selectivity of the measure.
Komisija nadalje opozarja, da je v primeru zavarovalnic za zavarovanje lastnih tveganj v Alandskih otokih ugotovila materialno selektivnost ukrepa.
It was not therefore necessary for the purposes of reaching a final negative decision on the measure to rely on its regional selectivity.
Zato se za sprejetje končne negativne odločbe o ukrepu ni bilo treba zanašati na njihovo regionalno selektivnost.
The Commission therefore concludes that by providing for a system of corporate taxation under which enterprises in Gibraltar are taxed, in general, at a lower rate than those in the United Kingdom, the reform confers a selective advantage on enterprises in Gibraltar.
Komisija torej ugotavlja, da z zagotavljanjem sistema davkov na pravne osebe, v okviru katerega so podjetja v Gibraltarju obdavčena, v splošnem, po nižji stopnji kot podjetja v Združenem kraljestvu, reforma omogoča selektivno prednost podjetjem v Gibraltarju.
Material selectivity
Materialna selektivnost
The requirement to make a profit before incurring a tax liability
Zahteva, da mora podjetje imeti dobiček, da je zavezano davčni obveznosti
One consequence of the limitation of the combined liability for payroll tax and business property occupation tax to 15 % of profits is that regardless of their payroll and occupation of business property, companies that make no profit are not taxed.
Ena posledica omejevanja združene obveznosti za davek na izplačane plače in davek na poslovne prostore za dejavnost na 15 % dobička je, da ne glede na izplačila osebnih dohodkov in poslovne prostore, ki jih imajo, družbe, ki nimajo dobička, niso obdavčene.
This in effect acts as an exemption for unprofitable companies and constitutes an advantage which relieves such companies of the liability for payroll tax and business property occupation tax which would normally be borne by their budgets.
To učinkuje kot izjema za nedonosna podjetja in predstavlja prednost, ki takšne družbe obveznosti oprošča plačevanja davka na izplačane plače in davka na poslovne prostore za dejavnost, ki bi ga drugače morale plačati iz svojih proračunov.
This exemption from the payroll and business property occupation taxes is selective as it applies only to those companies that make no profit.
Ta oprostitev od davka na izplačane plače in davka na poslovne prostore za dejavnost je selektivna, saj velja samo za družbe, ki nimajo dobička.
In addition to enterprises in difficulty and those whose principal source of income is derived from capital gains, in any particular year such companies might include, for example, enterprises operating in cyclical business environments, enterprises in the initial stage of their business and companies where profits are eliminated through additional payments to shareholder-employees or to other employees.
Poleg podjetij v težavah in podjetij, katerih glavni vir prihodka so kapitalni dobički, lahko v vsakem danem letu ta podjetja vključujejo, na primer, podjetja, ki delujejo v okoljih cikličnega poslovanja, podjetja na začetni stopnji poslovanja in podjetja, katerih dobički so izničeni z dodatnimi izplačili zaposlenim-delničarjem ali drugim zaposlenim.
The Commission cannot accept the United Kingdom's arguments to the effect that the inherent quantitative limitation in the system which exempts unprofitable companies applies in the same way to all companies regardless of their size or sector and is therefore not selective.
Komisija ne more sprejeti argumenta Združenega kraljestva, da prirojena količinska omejitev v sistemu, ki oprošča nedonosna podjetja, velja na enak način za vsa podjetja, ne glede na njihovo velikost ali sektor, in zato ni selektivna.
Although apparently general, certain definable categories of companies benefiting from the exemption from tax can in fact be identified, as will be shown later.
Čeprav je na videz splošna, je mogoče imenovati določene opredeljive kategorije družb, ki imajo korist od oprostitve od davka, kot bo pokazano kasneje.
Nor can the Commission accept the United Kingdom's arguments that even if the exemption for unprofitable companies were selective, it is justified by the nature or scheme of the corporate tax system.
Komisija tudi ne more sprejeti argumentov Združenega kraljestva, da je oprostitev za nedonosna podjetja, tudi če bi bila selektivna, upravičena z naravo ali shemo sistema davka od dobička pravnih oseb.
While exemption of non-profitable companies is an intrinsic feature of a system based on taxation of profits, this is not the case when the tax is levied on the number of employees or on the business use of property.
Medtem ko je oprostitev nedonosnih družb notranja lastnost sistema, ki temelji na obdavčitvi dobička, to ni tako v primeru, ko se davek obračuna glede na število zaposlenih ali na poslovno uporabo prostorov.
Such systems have been conceived in a way that establishes an entirely different basis for corporate entities to be taxed.
Takšni sistemi so bili izdelani na način, ki vzpostavlja popolnoma drugačno osnovo za obdavčitev pravnih oseb.
For example, it is in the internal logic of a payroll tax system that each and every employee should result in a corresponding payroll tax liability for the enterprise that employs them.
Na primer, v notranji logiki sistema davka na izplačane plače je, da mora vsak posamezni zaposleni za podjetje, ki ga zaposluje, predstavljati ustrezno obveznost za plačilo davka na izplačane plače.
In this sense, the parallel drawn by the Commission with social security contributions is valid, regardless of the fact, as the United Kingdom observes, that their purpose is different from a tax measure.
V tem smislu je vzporednica, ki jo je Komisija potegnila s prispevki za socialno varnost, veljavna, ne glede na dejstvo, kot je opozorilo Združeno kraljestvo, da je njihov namen drugačen od davčnega ukrepa.
Even if a payroll tax were introduced as a proxy for a profit tax (this is not an argument put forward by the United Kingdom), it would still be within the logic of a payroll tax system for unprofitable companies to be liable to the tax.
Četudi bi davek na izplačane plače bil uveden kot približek za davek na dobiček (to ni argument, ki bi ga predstavilo Združeno kraljestvo), bi nedonosne družbe znotraj logike sistema davka na izplačane plače davek še vedno morale plačati.
The use of payroll as a proxy for profitability removes the need to ascertain profits or overcomes difficulties in doing so.
Uporaba davka na izplačane plače kot približka za donosnost odstrani potrebo po ugotavljanju dobička ali odpravi težave pri tem.
This is not the situation in Gibraltar, where under the reform, measurement of company profits is a feature of the rules for both the payroll tax and the top-up tax.
To ni stanje v Gibraltarju, kjer je, v okviru reforme, meritev dobička družbe značilnost pravil tako za davek na izplačane plače kot za dopolnilni davek.
The United Kingdom states that the system is based on the profitable use of labour and as such coherent.
Združeno kraljestvo navaja, da sistem temelji na dobičkonosni uporabi delovne sile in je kot tak koherenten.
This suggests the existence of a hybrid system, where two different tax bases are used according to the situation of the companies.
To nakazuje obstoj hibridnega sistema, kjer se v skladu s stanjem družb uporabljata dve različni davčni osnovi.
Under these circumstances, it becomes impossible to detect the nature and general scheme of the system and to apply this justification.
V teh okoliščinah postane nemogoče ugotoviti naravo in splošno shemo sistema ter ga upravičiti.
In particular, it cannot be considered that any given feature of such a system forms part of the general scheme, since this would amount to accepting an automatic justification for such a system.
Zlasti nemogoče je katero koli dano lastnost takšnega sistema obravnavati, kot da tvori del splošne sheme, saj bi to vodilo v sprejetje avtomatične upravičenosti za tak sistem.
The Commission therefore concludes that the exemption of unprofitable companies from payroll tax and business property occupation tax through the operation of the 15 % cap is selective and, if the other conditions are fulfilled, may constitute State aid to those companies that benefit from it.
Komisija zato ugotavlja, da je oprostitev nedonosnih družb od plačila davka na izplačane plače in davka na poslovne prostore za dejavnost preko delovanja 15 % omejitve selektivna, in lahko, če so drugi pogoji izpolnjeni, predstavlja državno pomoč tistim družbam, ki imajo od te oprostitve korist.
It cannot be justified by the nature or general scheme of the proposed tax system.
Ni je mogoče upravičiti z naravo ali splošno shemo predlaganega davčnega sistema.
This is without prejudice to the assessment of the compatibility of such a measure.
To je brez poseganja v oceno združljivosti takšnega ukrepa.
The 15 % cap on liability to payroll tax and business property occupation tax
15 % omejitev za plačevanje davka na izplačane plače in davka na poslovne prostore za dejavnost
A second consequence of the limitation of the combined liability for payroll tax and business property occupation tax to 15 % of profits is that profitable companies whose tax liability would otherwise exceed this threshold are relieved of tax they would have to pay in excess of this threshold.
Druga posledica omejitve za plačevanje združene obveznosti za davek na izplačane plače in davek na poslovne prostore za dejavnost na 15 % dobička je, da so donosne družbe, katerih davčna zavezanost bi drugače presegla to mejo, oproščene davka nad to mejo, ki bi ga drugače morale plačati.
This tax reduction constitutes an advantage to those companies that benefit from it by relieving them of a charge that would normally be borne by their budgets.
To znižanje davkov predstavlja prednost tistim družbam, ki imajo od njega korist, tako da jih oprošča dajatve, ki bi jo družbe drugače plačale iz svojih proračunov.
The 15 % cap is also selective, as only a limited number of companies will enjoy a reduction in their tax liability through its application.
15 % omejitev je tudi selektivna, saj bo ob njeni uporabi samo omejeno število družb koristilo takšno znižanje davka.
Although the United Kingdom and Gibraltar no longer claim that as few as 10 enterprises will benefit from the cap, it nevertheless limits the scope of application of the payroll tax and the business property tax.
Čeprav Združeno kraljestvo in Gibraltar ne trdita več, da bo le okrog 10 podjetij od omejitve imelo korist, to vseeno omejuje obseg uporabe davka na izplačane plače in davka na poslovne prostore za dejavnost.
The beneficiaries will be labour intensive companies, that is those which, for the tax year in question, have low profits in relation to their number of employees and occupation of business property.
Upravičenci bodo družbe z intenzivno delovno silo, to so tiste, ki imajo v zadevnem davčnem letu majhen dobiček glede na število zaposlenih in zasedanje poslovnih prostorov.
The application of a pure payroll and business property tax system might imply a very high level of taxation for such companies.
Uporaba čistega sistema davka na izplačane plače in davka na poslovne prostore za dejavnost bi za takšne družbe lahko pomenila visoko stopnjo obdavčitve.
The Commission notes the United Kingdom's and Gibraltar's arguments that a specific group of companies cannot be identified and that the rules are generally applicable to all companies in Gibraltar.
Komisija je seznanjena z argumenti Združenega kraljestva in Gibraltarja, da ni mogoče določiti specifične skupine družb in da pravila splošno veljajo za vse družbe v Gibraltarju.
However, this does not prevent the 15 % cap from being de facto selective in the manner described in the previous paragraph.
To pa ne pomeni, da 15 % omejitev ni, dejansko, selektivna na način, opisan v prejšnjem odstavku.
In this respect, the references made to point 14 of the Notice by the United Kingdom and Gibraltar are not relevant since it does not exclude the possibility that apparently general measures may constitute state aid.
V zvezi s tem sklicevanja Združenega kraljestva in Gibraltarja na točko 14 Obvestila niso pomembna, saj točka ne izključuje možnosti, da navidezno splošni ukrepi predstavljajo državno pomoč.
In particular point 14 covers, for example, tax incentives for specific investment and measures designed to reduce the taxation of labour ‘for all firms’, which is not the case with the 15 % cap, benefiting only companies that make relatively small profit as compared to their number of employees.
Zlasti točka 14 pokriva npr. davčne spodbude za določene investicije in ukrepe, namenjene zmanjševanju obdavčevanja delovne sile „za vsa podjetja“, kar v primeru 15 % omejitve ne drži, ker koristi samo družbam, ki imajo relativno majhen dobiček v primerjavi s številom zaposlenih.
In addition, the 15 % cap is not a purely technical measure in the sense of the first indent of point 13 of the Notice.
Dodatno, 15 % omejitev ni čisto tehnični ukrep v smislu prve alineje točke 13 Obvestila.
Whilst conventional systems of corporation tax limit the proportion of profits paid in taxes through the setting of the rates of tax (banded systems include a top or maximum tax rate), the equivalent technical measure in a payroll tax system is the rate of tax per employee, in the Gibraltar case, set at a uniform rate of GBP 3000.
Medtem ko konvencionalni sistemi davka od dobička pravnih oseb omejujejo razmerje dobička, plačanega z davki, s postavljanjem stopenj davka (sistemi, urejeni po pasovih, vključujejo vrhnjo ali najvišjo stopnjo davka), je enakovreden tehnični ukrep v sistemu davka na izplačane plače stopnja davka na zaposlenega, v primeru Gibraltarja določena na enotno stopnjo 3000 GBP.
The introduction in a payroll and property tax system of a cap linked to a different criterion, namely the level of profits, cannot be compared with the application of variable rates in a progressive system of profit taxation, which is justified by the nature and general scheme of the system (point 24 of the Notice).
Uvedba omejitve, povezane z drugim kriterijem, v sistem davka na izplačane plače in lastnino, še posebej stopnje dobička, se ne more primerjati z uporabo različnih stopenj v progresivnem sistemu obdavčevanja dobička, ki je upravičen z naravo in splošno shemo sistema (točka 24 Obvestila).
Nor is the 15 % cap a measure pursuing a general economic policy objective, in the sense of the second indent of point 13 of the Notice, as it does not reduce the tax burden related to certain production costs for the whole economy of Gibraltar, but it only benefits a limited number of undertakings.
15 % omejitev tudi ne sledi splošnemu cilju gospodarske politike v smislu druge alineje točke 13 Obvestila, saj ne zmanjšuje davčne obremenitve, povezane z določenimi proizvodnimi stroški, za celotno gospodarstvo Gibraltarja, ampak koristi samo omejenemu številu podjetij.
Furthermore, the cap is not directly linked to the labour or business property costs but rather to the profitability of companies.
Nadalje, omejitev ni neposredno povezana s stroški delovne sile ali poslovnih prostorov, ampak z donosnostjo družb.
The latter is an element external to a payroll and business property tax.
To zadnje je element, ki je zunaj davka na izplačane plače in davka od dobička pravnih oseb.
The Commission does not accept the United Kingdom's argument that if the 15 % cap is selective, it is justified by the nature and or general scheme of the system of which it is part.
Komisija ne sprejema argumenta Združenega kraljestva, da je 15 % omejitev, če je selektivna, upravičena z naravo in/ali splošno shemo sistema, katerega del je.
There is nothing intrinsic in a system of taxation of the profitable use of labour and property which requires a limit on the proportion of profits which a company must pay as a result of its use of those taxable factors.
V sistemu obdavčitve dobičkonosne uporabe delovne sile in lastnine ni nobene notranje lastnosti, ki zahteva omejitev za razmerje dobička, ki ga mora družba plačati kot posledico lastne uporabe teh obdavčljivih dejavnikov.
The inherent logic of such a system is that the more people a company employs and the more property it occupies, the greater the tax liability.
Prirojena logika takšnega sistema je, da več ljudi kot družba zaposluje in več lastnine kot ima, večja je njena davčna obveznost.
The arguments put forward by the United Kingdom are essentially economic in nature.
Argumenti, ki jih je predstavilo Združeno kraljestvo so v bistvu gospodarske narave.
They are not related to the internal logic of the proposed system.
Niso povezani z notranjo logiko predlaganega sistema.
The United Kingdom suggests that the Gibraltar economy is more vulnerable than most to shocks created by tax competition and that companies may not be able to afford to leave a large Member State as easily as they can move out of Gibraltar.
Združeno kraljestvo nakazuje, da je gospodarstvo Gibraltarja bolj od večine drugih ranljivo na sunke, ki jih ustvari davčna konkurenca in da se družbe morda ne morejo s takšno lahkoto preseliti iz druge države članice, kot se lahko preselijo iz Gibraltarja.
However, the Commission notes that little evidence has been adduced to support this hypothesis, which, if true, suggests that the 15 % cap is part of a strategy designed to retain if not attract mobile capital to Gibraltar, which given the physical constraints of the territory, is likely to be targeted at financial and other services.
Komisija pa opozarja, da je bilo navedenih malo dokazov v podporo tej hipotezi, ki, če je resnična, nakazuje, da je 15 % omejitev del strategije, namenjene ohranitvi, ali celo pridobitvi novega, mobilnega kapitala v Gibraltarju, na katerega bodo, glede na fizične omejitve ozemlja, verjetno ciljali pri finančnih in drugih storitvah.
Similarly, the argument that a regressive element is not required in the taxation of utilities, which occupy monopoly or quasi-monopoly positions in the Gibraltar market, indicates that mobile capital is the target of the 15 % cap.
Podobno, argument, da regresivni element pri obdavčitvi javnih gospodarskih služb, ki zasedajo monopolne ali kvazimonopolne položaje na trgu Gibraltarja, ni potreben, nakazuje, da je cilj 15 % omejitve mobilni kapital.
As for the suggestion that without a regressive element, a labour tax could trigger mass layoffs and instability in times of cyclical market fluctuations, the Commission would simply note that this is an inherent feature of such a system.
Kar se tiče domneve, da bi davek na delovno silo brez regresivnega elementa lahko sprožil masovna začasna odpuščanja in nestabilnost v časih cikličnih tržnih nihanj, Komisija preprosto opozarja, da je to prirojena lastnost takšnega sistema.
In any event, at GBP 3000 per employee, the payroll tax would represent only a small proportion of the overall unit labour costs [34].
V vsakem primeru pa bi, pri 3000 GBP na zaposlenega, davek na izplačane plače predstavljal le majhen delež celotnih stroškov delovne sile na enoto [34].
Therefore the incentive to shed labour in order to control costs will exist to a similar extent with or without a payroll tax.
Torej bo spodbuda za umaknitev delovne sile, zato da bi nadzirali stroške, v podobnem obsegu obstajala z ali brez davka na izplačane plače.
The Commission also notes the impact of the 15 % cap on the offshore and onshore sectors of the Gibraltar economy.
Komisija upošteva tudi vpliv, ki ga bo 15 % omejitev imela na priobalne in obalne sektorje gospodarstva Gibraltarja.