natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Such a burden would have been particularly heavy for energy-intensive undertakings without the tax rebate assessed in this Decision.
Brez povrnitve dajatev, ki so predmet te preiskave, bi bilo takšno breme zelo veliko predvsem za podjetja, ki porabijo veliko energije.
When the national measure was drawn up, there was no established practice regarding the legal assessment of exemptions from or reductions in such taxes which formally apply to different sectors of the economy but which are nevertheless selective, because they grant an intrinsic, de facto and specific advantage to certain sectors.
Ko je bil ta ukrep znotraj države zasnovan, še ni bilo stalne prakse za pravno presojo izjem ali zmanjšanja takšnih dajatev, ki se formalno uporabljajo v različnih gospodarskih panogah, vendar so kljub temu selektivni, saj se pravzaprav odobrijo samo, dejansko in specifično prednost v korist določenih sektorjev.
On the other hand, it is conceivable that, in the present case, the wording of the Court’s answer to the second question in Adria-Wien may have led some beneficiaries to believe in good faith that the national measures at issue before the national court would cease to be selective, and therefore cease to constitute State aid, if their benefit were extended to sectors other than the manufacture of goods.
Po drugi strani pa je jasno, da v obravnavanem primeru odgovor sodišča na drugo vprašanje v sodbi Adria-Wien lahko privedlo do tega, da bi nekateri prejemniki pomoči v dobri veri izhajali iz tega, da sporni ukrepi znotraj države, ki jih je obravnaval državni sodnik, ne bodo več selektivni in s tem ne bodo več predstavljali državne pomoči, v kolikor bi se njihova veljavnost poleg sektorja za proizvodnjo fizičnega gospodarskega blaga razširila še na druge sektorje.
Taking all these considerations into account, the Commission comes to the conclusion that, in the present case, recovery would be contrary to the principle of protection of legitimate expectations.
Ob upoštevanju vseh teh premislekov je Komisija prišla do sklepa, da v obravnavanem primeru zahteva za vračilo ne bi bila v skladu s načelom o varstvu zakonitih pričakovanj.
Therefore, in accordance with Article 14 of Regulation (EC) No 659/1999, the Commission decides that recovery shall not be required.
V skladu s členom 14 Uredbe št. 659/1999 se je Komisija odločila, da naj se vračilo ne zahteva.
Aid for agricultural primary production
Pomoči za kmetijsko primarno proizvodnjo
The tax refund system is applicable to agriculture and forestry under the same conditions as for other beneficiary sectors.
Ureditev povrnitve dajatev velja za kmetijstvo in gozdarstvo pod istimi pogoji kot za ostale sektorje, ki so bili deležni pomoči.
The Community guidelines on State aid for environmental protection do not apply to agriculture.
Okvir Skupnosti za državne okoljevarstvene pomoči ne velja za kmetijstvo.
When assessing multi-sectoral State aid in the context of energy taxes [12], the Commission has, however, accepted equal treatment for agriculture and forestry with other sectors subject to the general environmental aid guidelines.
Z ocenitvijo pomoči, ki presega meje enega sektorja v okviru dajatev na energijo [12] je Komisija premišljala o enakem obravnavanju kmetijstva in gozdarstva z drugimi gospodarskimi panogami, s pridržkom splošnih smernic okoljevarstvene pomoči.
The above considerations therefore also apply to the assessment of aid to the agricultural sector.
Zgornje navedbe tako veljajo tudi za oceno pomoči v kmetijstvu.
CONCLUSION
SKLEPANJE
The Commission finds that Austria has unlawfully implemented the Energy Tax Rebate Act 1996 in the form of Law 158/2002 and without modification extended it until 31 December 2003 in breach of Article 88(3) of the Treaty.
Komisija je ugotovila, da je Avstrija s kršitvijo člena 88(3) Pogodbe ES nezakonito sprejela zakon o povrnitvi dajatev na energijo iz leta 1996 v okviru 158. zveznega zakona 2002, ki je bil v nespremenjeni obliki podaljšan do 31. decembra 2003.
As regards undertakings to which the Energy Tax Rebate Act was not applicable until 31 December 2001, the aid scheme is incompatible with the Community guidelines on State aid for environmental protection, and in particular points 52 and 45 thereof, and any other derogations from Article 87(2) and (3) of the EC Treaty.
Kar zadeva podjetja, za katera zakon o povrnitvi dajatev na energijo do 31. decembra 2001 ni veljal, ureditev pomoči ni združljiva z okvirom Skupnosti za okoljevarstvene pomoči, posebej s točkama 52 in 45 kakor tudi z drugimi izrednimi določitvami člena 87(2) in (3) Pogodbe ES.
As regards undertakings to which the Energy Tax Rebate Act was applicable already before 31 December 2001, the aid scheme is incompatible with the Community guidelines on State aid for environmental protection, and in particular point 51.1.b second indent thereof, and any other derogations from Article 87(2) and (3) of the EC Treaty.
Kar zadeva podjetja, za katera je zakon o povrnitvi dajatev na energijo veljal že pred 31. decembrom 2001, ureditev pomoči ni združljiva z okvirom Skupnosti za okoljevarstvene pomoči, posebej točke 51.1, črka (b), drugi pododstavek in z ostalimi izrednimi določitvami člena 87(2) in (3) Pogodbe ES.
Since no other grounds for compatibility can be envisaged for the scheme as such, the latter is incompatible with the common market.
Ker ni bilo možno navesti nobenih drugih razlogov za združljivost ureditve, je zato nezdružljiva s skupnim trgom.
Nevertheless, in view of the specific circumstances of the present case and in accordance with Article 14 of Regulation (EC) No 659/1999, recovery shall not be required.
Kljub temu pa se zaradi upoštevanja posebnih okoliščin obravnavanega primera in skladnosti s členom 14 Uredbe (ES) št. 659/1999, ne zahteva vračilo.
The Commission takes note of the commitment of the Austrian Government to retroactively modify the energy tax rebate.
Komisija se je seznanila z namero avstrijske vlade, da bo vračilo dajatev na energijo spremenila retroaktivno.
The Commission considers the modifications as described above to be compatible with the Community guidelines on State aid for environmental protection, and in particular point 52 read in conjunction with point 45 and point 51.1.b second indent thereof,
Komisija meni, da so zgoraj navedene spremembe združljive z okvirom Skupnosti o okoljski pomoči, zlasti točka 52 v povezavi s točko 45 in točko 51.1(b), odstavek 2.
The tax rebate granted by Austria for the year 2002 under the Energy Tax Rebate Act 1996 as amended by Law 158/2002 and extended without modification until 31 December 2003 is an unlawful State aid scheme incompatible with the common market.
Povrnitev dajatev, ki jo je Avstrija leta 2002 sprejela z zakonom o povrnitvi dajatev na energijo iz leta 1996, noveliranim s 158. zveznim zakonom 2002, in ga nespremenjenega podaljšala do 31. decembra 2003, predstavlja nezakonito in s skupnim trgom nezdružljivo državno pomoč.
Austria shall abolish the scheme referred to in Article 1 in so far as it continues to produce effects.
Avstrija odpravlja program pomoči iz člena 1, če je še vedno veljavna.
Austria shall take all necessary measures to modify the measure retroactively as promised by the Austrian authorities in their letter of 5 December 2003.
Avstrija sprejme vse potrebne ukrepe, da se ukrep prilagodi retroaktivno, kakor navajajo avstrijski organi v dopisu z dne 5. decembra 2003.
Austria shall inform the Commission, within two months following notification of this Decision, of the measures taken to comply with it.
Avstrija v dveh mesecih po notifikaciji te odločbe seznani Komisijo z ukrepi, sprejetimi z namenom uresničevanja te odločbe.
Done at Brussels, 9 March 2004.
V Bruslju, 9. marca 2004
OJ C 164, 15.7.2003, p. 2.
UL C 164, 15.7.2003, str. 2.
In accordance with Regulation (EEC, Euratom) No 1182/71 of the Council of 3 June 1971 determining the rules applicable to periods, dates and time limits (OJ L 124, 8.6.1971, p. 1), and in particular Article 3 thereof, the period for submission of comments ended on 18 August 2003.
V skladu z Uredbo Sveta (EGS) št. 1182/71 z dne 3.6.1971 o določitvi pravil glede rokov, datumov in iztekov rokov (UL L 124, 8.6.1971, str. 1), zlasti člena 3, se je 18. avgusta 2003 končal rok za oddajo stališč.
Case C-143/99 Adria-Wien Pipeline GmbH and Wietersdorfer & Peggauer Zementwerke GmbH v Finanzlandesdirektion für Kärnten [2001] ECR I-8365.The Austrian Constitutional Court referred two questions to the Court of Justice for a preliminary ruling:1.
Sodba z dne 8. novembra 2001, zadeva C-143/99 Adria-Wien Pipeline, Wietersdorfer&Peggauer Zementwerke GmbH v Finanzlandesdirektion für Kärnten PSES 2001, str. I-8365.Avstrijsko ustavno sodišče je sodišču predložilo v predhodno odločanje dve vprašanji:1.
Are legislative measures of a Member State which provide for a rebate of energy taxes on natural gas and electricity but grant that rebate only to undertakings whose activity is shown to consist primarily in the manufacture of goods, to be regarded as State aid within the meaning of Article 92 of the EC Treaty?2.
Ali je treba zakonske ukrepe držav članic, ki predvidevajo delno povrnitev dajatev na energijo na zemeljski plin in električno energijo, vendar pa povrnitev priznavajo le podjetjem, katerih težišče je dokazljivo proizvodnja materialnih dobrin, obravnavati kot državno pomoč v smislu člena 92 Pogodbe ES?2.
If the answer to Question 1 is in the affirmative, is such a legislative measure to be regarded as State aid within the meaning of Article 92 of the EC Treaty even if it applies to all undertakings, regardless of whether their activity is shown to consist primarily in the manufacture of goods?
Če je odgovor na prvo vprašanje pritrdilen: Se tovrstni zakonski ukrep obravnava kot pomoč v skladu s členom 92 Pogodbe ES tudi v primeru, če se odobri vsem podjetjem ne glede na to, ali je težišče dokazljivo proizvodnja materialnih dobrin?
See Judgment of the Court of Justice in Case C-105/91 Commission v Greece [1992] ECR I-5871; Judgment in Case C 11/95 Commission v Belgium [1996] ECR I-4115; Judgment in Case C-365/97 Commission v Italy [1999] ECR I-7773; and Judgment in Case C-113/86 Commission v Italy [1998] ECR 607.
Glej sodbo sodišča Evropskih skupnosti z dne 17. novembra 1992 v pravni zadevi C-105/91, Komisija/Grčija, PSES 1992, str. I-5871; sodba z dne 10. septembra 1996 v pravni zadevi C-11/95 Komisija/Belgija, PSES 1996, str. I-4415; sodba z dne 9. januarja 1999 v pravni zadevi C-365/97 Komisija/Italija, PSES 1999, str. I-7773 in sodba z dne 4. februarja 1988 v pravni zadevi 113/86 Komisija/Italija, PSES 1988, str. 607.
E.g. N 449/2001 — Germany, N 123/2000 — United Kingdom, C 42/2003 — Sweden.
Glej N 449/2001 – Nemčija, N 123/2000 – Združeno kraljestvo, C 42/2003 – Švedska.
The Commission notes that these modifications have not yet entered into force.
Komisija je ugotovila, da te spremembe še niso veljavne.
OJ L 83, 27.3.1999, p. 1.
UL L 83, 27.3.1999, str. 1
Case C-265/85 Van den Bergh en Jurgens BV v Commission [1987] ECR 1155, paragraph 44.
Sodba sodišča z dne 11. marca 1987 v pravni zadevi 265/85, Van den Bergh in Jurgens BV/Komisija, PSES 1987, str. 1155, opomba 44.
See, in particular, the Commission decisions on the German ecotax, NN 47/99 (OJ C 166, 12.6.1999) and N 575/A/99 (OJ C 322, 11.11.2000).
Glej zlasti odločbe Komisije o nemškem ekološkem davku (Ökosteuer), NN 47/99 (UL C 166, 12.6.1999) v zadevi o pomoči N 575/A/99 (UL C 322, 11.11.2000).
This follows from the wording of point 51.1.b first indent, which allows for tax reductions from a harmonised tax if the beneficiaries pay more than the Community minimum rates ‘in order to provide firms with an incentive to improve environmental protection’.
To se je izkazalo iz besedila prve alinee črke (b) točke 51.1, po čemer se lahko usklajeni davki znižajo, če je znesek, ki ga izplača podjetje, ki jim je bila odobrena povračilo dajatev, višji od skupnega najnižjega dovoljenega zneska, „zato, da se podjetja vzpodbudi k ukrepom za izboljšanje varstva okolja“.
While for the period under examination the Austrian energy tax was a national tax, from 1 January 2004 the energy taxation Directive establishes harmonised taxation, setting minimum tax rates for the use of the energy products taxed and subject to the rebate under the Austrian energy taxation legislation.
V obdobju preiskave je bila avstrijska dajatev na energijo državni davek, od 1. januarja 2004 pa je bilo z direktivo o obdavčenju energije uvedeno usklajeno obdavčenje, ki določa najnižjo davčno stopnjo za uporabo energijskih proizvodov, ki so po avstrijskih zakonih o obdavčenju energije obdavčeni in povrnjeni.
Jungbunzlauer GmbH points out that the energy tax rebate is not aid in the sense of a direct monetary payment by the State. The economic burden of the energy taxation is meant to be on the end-user of energy.
Podjetje Jungbunzlauer Ges.m.b.H je v svojem stališču navedlo, da povrnitev dajatev na energijo ne predstavlja pomoči v smislu neposrednega denarnega plačila države.
relating to a proceeding under Article 81 of the EC Treaty and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement (Case No C.37.533 — Choline Chloride)
v zvezi s postopkom iz člena 81 Pogodbe ES in iz člena 53 Sporazuma EGP (Zadeva št. C.37.533 – holin klorid)
(notified under document number C(2004) 4717)
(notificirano pod dokumentarno številko K(2004) 4717)
(Only the English, French and German texts are authentic)
(Besedila v angleškem, francoskem in nemškem jeziku so edina verodostojna)
On 9 December 2004, the Commission adopted a decision relating to a proceeding under Article 81 of the EC Treaty and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement.
Dne 9. decembra 2004 je Komisija sprejela odločbo v zvezi s postopkom iz člena 81 Pogodbe ES in iz člena 53 Sporazuma EGP.
In accordance with the provisions of Article 30 of Council Regulation (EC) No 1/2003 [1], the Commission herewith publishes the names of the parties and the main content of the decision, including any penalties imposed, while having regard to the legitimate interest of undertakings in the protection of their business interests.
Komisija v skladu z določbami člena 30 Uredbe Sveta (ES) št. 1/2003 [1] objavlja imena udeleženih strani in glavno vsebino odločbe, vključno z naloženimi sankcijami, ob upoštevanju upravičenega zanimanja podjetij za zaščito poslovnih interesov.
A non-confidential version of the full text of the decision can be found in the authentic languages of the case and in the Commission’s working languages at DG COMP’s website at the following address: http://europa.eu.int/comm/competition/index_en.htmlI.
Nezaupna različica celotnega besedila odločbe se lahko v izvirnih jezikih in v delovnih jezikih Komisije najde na spletni strani DG COMP na naslovu: http://europa.eu.int/comm/competitionI.
The addressees participated in a single and continuous infringement of Article 81(1) of the Treaty establishing the European Community (hereinafter the EC Treaty or the Treaty) and, from 1 January 1994, Article 53(1) of the Agreement on the European Economic Area (hereinafter EEA Agreement), covering the whole of the EEA territory.
Naslovniki so sodelovali pri enotni in stalni kršitvi člena 81(1) Pogodbe o ustanovitvi Evropske skupnosti (v nadaljevanju „Pogodba ES“ ali „Pogodba“) in od 1. januarja 1994, člena 53(1) Sporazuma o Evropskem gospodarskem prostoru (v nadaljevanju „Sporazum EGP“), ki obsega celotno območje EGP.
The Commission initiated an investigation into the global choline chloride industry after it received a leniency application in April 1999 from the US supplier Bioproducts.
Komisija je začela preiskavo v celotni industriji holin klorida, potem ko je od ameriškega dobavitelja Bioproducts aprila 1999 prejela prošnjo za prizanesljivost pred denarno kaznijo.
The investigation covered the period from 1992 to the end of 1998 (hereafter referred to as the period of investigation).
Preiskava je zajela obdobje od leta 1992 do konca leta 1998 (v nadaljnjem besedilu „obdobje preiskave“).
The market for choline chloride
Trg za holin klorid
Choline chloride belongs to the B-complex group of water-soluble vitamins (vitamin B4).
Holin klorid spada v skupino vitaminov, topnih v vodi, B-kompleks (vitamin B4).
It is mainly used in the animal feed industry as a traditional feed additive, especially for poultry and swine, to increase growth, reduce mortality rates, increase feed efficiency, increase egg production and improve meat quality.
Večinoma se uporablja v industriji za živalsko krmo, kot tradicionalni krmni dodatek, zlasti za perutnino in svinje, za pospeševanje rasti, znižanje smrtnosti, povečanje krmnega izkoristka, proizvodnje jajc in izboljšanje kakovosti mesa.
At the start of the period of investigation, choline chloride was produced mainly in Europe and North America (United States and Canada), although there was also choline chloride production capacity in China, India, Japan, Korea and Taiwan.
Na začetku obdobja preiskave se je holin klorid proizvajal pretežno v Evropi in Severni Ameriki (Združene države in Kanada), čeprav je bila proizvodna zmogljivost holin klorida tudi na Kitajskem, v Indiji, Japonskem, Koreji in Tajvanu.
The North American producers were exporting to Central and South America, Europe, the Far East and South-East Asia.
Severnoameriški proizvajalci so izvažali v Srednjo in Južno Ameriko, Evropo, na Daljni vzhod in jugovzhod.
The European producers were starting to export to Central and South America, Africa, South-East Asia and the Far East.
Evropski proizvajalci so začeli izvažati v Srednjo in Južno Ameriko, Afriko, na jugovzhod in Daljni vzhod.
European and North American producers also had production facilities in different areas of the world and were expanding local production in order to cut transportation and storage costs and better penetrate local markets.
Evropski in severnoameriški proizvajalci so imeli proizvodne objekte na različnih območjih po svetu in so širili lokalno proizvodnjo, da bi prihranili stroške prevoza in skladiščenja ter bolje prodrli na lokalne trge.
In particular, BASF established production facilities in Mexico, Brazil and Thailand, Akzo Nobel and UCB in China, Ducoa in Mexico and Chinook in Singapore.
Zlasti BASF je ustanovil proizvodne objekte v Mehiki, Braziliji in na Tajskem, Akzo Nobel in UCB na Kitajskem, Ducoa v Mehiki in Chinook v Singapurju.
The size of the worldwide market for choline chloride was estimated at EUR 183,7 million in 1997, the last full year of the infringement, the EEA accounting for EUR 52,6 million. During the period of investigation, the producers involved in the infringement controlled more than 80 % of the world market.
Velikost svetovnega trga za holin klorid je bila ocenjena na 183,7 milijona EUR leta 1997, ki je bilo zadnje polno leto kršitve, pri čemer je delež EGP znašal 52,6 milijona EUR. Med preiskavo so proizvajalci, vpleteni v kršitve, nadzorovali več kot 80 % svetovnega trga.
The European producers concerned controlled close to 80 % of the EEA area.
Zadevni evropski proizvajalci so nadzorovali skoraj 80 % območja EGP.
Description of the cartel
Opis kartela
In so far as the EEA is concerned, the choline chloride cartel operated at two different, but closely related levels, the global level and the European level.
V zvezi z EGP je kartel holin klorida deloval na dveh različnih, vendar tesno povezanih ravneh, na svetovni in evropski ravni.
At the global level, all producers subject to this proceeding participated in anti-competitive activities concerning the EEA between June 1992 and April 1994.
Na svetovni ravni so vsi proizvajalci v tem postopku sodelovali v protikonkurenčnih dejavnostih v zvezi z EGP, med junijem 1992 in aprilom 1994.
These activities included the setting and increase of worldwide prices, the allocation of worldwide markets, the control of distributors and converters and the exchange of commercially sensitive information.
Te dejavnosti so vključevale določanje in povečanje svetovnih cen, razdelitev svetovnih trgov, nadzor distributerjev in pretvornikov ter izmenjavo poslovno občutljivih podatkov.
The North American producers did not participate in a series of further anti-competitive meetings strictly among the European producers to coordinate their behaviour on the European market.
Severnoameriški proizvajalci niso sodelovali pri vrsti nadaljnjih protikonkurenčnih srečanj, ki so potekala strogo med evropskimi proizvajalci, za usklajevanje obnašanja na evropskem trgu.
These meetings took place in the period between March 1994 and October 1998.
Ta srečanja so potekala v obdobju od marca 1994 do oktobra 1998.
Activities included the setting and increase of prices (both for the EEA as a whole, for particular national markets and for individual customers), the allocation of individual customers among the participating undertakings, the allocation of markets shares for each undertaking for the EEA market as a whole, the control of distributors and converters and the exchange of commercially sensitive information.
Dejavnosti so vključevale določanje in povečanje cen (za EGP oboje v celoti, za posebne nacionalne trge in za posamezne stranke), razdelitev posameznih strank med sodelujoča podjetja, razdelitev tržnih deležev vsakega podjetja za EGP trg v celoti, nadzor distributerjev in pretvornikov ter izmenjavo poslovno občutljivih podatkov.
The Commission has found that the arrangements at the global and European levels together were part of an overall scheme which laid down the lines of action in the EEA of the members of the cartel and restricted their individual commercial conduct in order to pursue a single anti-competitive economic aim, namely the distortion of normal competitive conditions in the EEA for choline chloride.
Komisija je ugotovila, da so bili dogovori na svetovni in evropski ravni skupaj del skupne sheme, ki je določila zasnove ukrepanja članov kartela v EGP in omejila njihovo posamezno poslovno ravnanje, da bi dosegla enotni protikonkurenčni gospodarski cilj, zlasti izkrivljanje običajnih konkurenčnih pogojev v EGP za holin klorid.
The North American producers participated in this scheme for some time (between October 1992 and April 1994, a period of one year and six months) and the European producers for the entire period (between October 1992 and September 1998, a period of five years and eleven months).
Severnoameriški proizvajalci so sodelovali pri tej shemi nekaj časa (med oktobrom 1992 in aprilom 1994, obdobje enega leta in šestih mesecev), evropski proizvajalci pa celotno obdobje (med oktobrom 1992 in septembrom 1998, obdobje petih let in enajstih mesecev).
Limitation period
Zastaranje
The North American producers ended their participation in the infringement at the end of the global meeting which took place between 14 and 20 April 1994.
Severnoameriški proizvajalci so zaključili sodelovanje pri kršitvi ob koncu svetovnega srečanja, ki je potekalo med 14. in 20. aprilom 1994.
The first action taken by the Commission to investigate the infringement was on 26 May 1999.
Prvi odziv Komisije na preiskavo kršitve je bil 26. maja 1999.
As this action took place more than five years after the North American producers had ended their participation to the infringement [2], no fines can be imposed on the North American producers, Bioproducts, Chinook and DuCoa.
Ker se je to zgodilo več kot pet let po zaključku sodelovanja pri kršitvi severnoameriških proizvajalcev [2], se ne more naložiti nobenih glob za severnoameriške proizvajalce Bioproducts, Chinook in DuCoa.
Gravity
Teža
The infringement in this case consisted primarily of secret collusion among cartel members to fix prices in the EEA, supported by market sharing and agreed actions against competitors there.
V tem primeru je bila kršitev predvsem skrivno dogovarjanje med člani kartela za določitev cen v EGP, s podporo tržnih deležev in dogovorjenih dejavnosti proti tamkajšnjim konkurentom.
These kinds of horizontal restrictions are, by their very nature, among the worst kinds of violations of Article 81(1) of the Treaty and Article 53(1) of the EEA Agreement.
Te vrste vodoravnih omejitev so po naravi med najhujšimi kršitvami člena 81(1) Pogodbe in člena 53(1) Sporazuma EGP.