natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
The rateable value for 2001 for therefore set at GBP 467 million ×65,03 %/68,47 % = GBP 443 million for England and GBP 26 million × 65,03 %/68,47 % = GBP 24,7 million for Wales.
Obdavčljiva vrednost za leto 2001 je bila torej določena na 467 milijonov GBP x 65,03 %/68,47 % = 443 milijonov GBP za Anglijo in 26 milijonov GBP x 65,03 %/68,47 %= 24,7 milijona GBP za Wales.
The following year, OFCOM data suggested a small reduction of its market share, which however led to no reduction of BT's rateable value.
V naslednjem letu so podatki urada OFCOM pokazali manjše znižanje njegovega tržnega deleža, vendar to ni povzročilo znižanja obdavčljive vrednosti BT.
In the years 2003/4 and 2004/5, BT's market share increased to 67,6 % and 68,0 % respectively.
V letih 2003/4 in 2004/5 se je tržni delež BT povečal na 67,6 % oziroma 68,0 %.
Compared to the benchmark market share in 2000, it led to rateable values of GBP 447,5 million and GBP 450,6 million respectively.
V primerjavi z merilom uspešnosti tržnega deleža v letu 2000 je povzročil obdavčljivi vrednosti v višini 447,5 milijona GBP oziroma 450,6 milijona GBP.
This method gave the following results for the 1995-2000 and 2000-2005 periods:
Na podlagi te metode so bili za obdobji 1995–2000 in 2000–2005 dobljeni naslednji rezultati:
GBP 412 million
412 milijonov GBP
GBP 23 million
23 milijonov GBP
GBP 392 million
392 milijonov GBP
GBP 22 million
22 milijonov GBP
GBP 366 million
366 milijonov GBP
GBP 20 million
20 milijonov GBP
GBP 347 million
347 milijonov GBP
GBP 19 million
19 milijonov GBP
GBP 443,5 million
443,5 milijona GBP
GBP 24,7 million
24,7 milijona GBP
GBP 447,5 million
447,5 milijona GBP
GBP 24,9 million
24,9 milijona GBP
GBP 450,6 million
450,6 milijona GBP
GBP 25,1 million
25,1 milijona GBP
For the 2005-2010 period, the UK authorities indicated that, due to the lack of available data from OFCOM, the revision mechanism applied for the first two periods will be discontinued.
Za obdobje 2005–2010 so organi Združenega kraljestva navedli, da bo mehanizem popravkov, ki se je uporabljal za prvi dve obdobji, zaradi pomanjkanja razpoložljivih podatkov urada OFCOM ukinjen.
In place of the former system, the UK authorities intend to apply a full R&E method annually, which will reflect all physical changes, including new lit fibres, but in the context of the economic conditions existing at the antecedent valuation date.
Namesto nekdanjega sistema nameravajo organi Združenega kraljestva vsako leto uporabiti popolno metodo prejemkov in izdatkov, kar bo odražalo vse fizične spremembe, vključno z novo priključenimi optičnimi vlakni, vendar v okviru gospodarskih razmer, ki so obstajale na datum predhodnega vrednotenja.
This system is still being finalised.
Sistem se še dokončno oblikuje.
In the case of Kingston, no revision mechanism was applied.
V primeru Kingstona se mehanizem popravkov ni uporabljal.
According to the UK authorities, no adjustment was undertaken for the 1995 and 2000 rating lists on the basis that no competitors built networks in the Kingston upon Hull conurbation area and that Kingston already had a network coverage of almost 100 % in the area, so it did not extend its network.
Po navedbah organov Združenega kraljestva pri seznamih za odmero davka za leti 1995 in 2000 ni bilo prilagoditev, in sicer na podlagi dejstva, da nobeden od konkurentov ni zgradil omrežij v somestju Kingston upon Hull in je imel Kingston na tem območju že skoraj 100-odstotno omrežno pokritost, zato svojega omrežja ni razširil.
The UK Authorities first emphasise that all valuation methods should arrive at the same result: the hypothetical rent that would be paid for the hereditament.
Organi Združenega kraljestva najprej poudarjajo, da morajo vse metode vrednotenja dati enak rezultat: hipotetično najemnino, ki bi se plačala za nepremičnino.
Therefore, the fact that a different method of valuation was applied to BT and Kingston, on the one hand, and to the other telecommunications operators, on the other, is not an indication that an advantage could have been granted to the former.
Potemtakem dejstvo, da se je pri BT in Kingstonu uporabila drugačna metoda kot pri drugih telekomunikacijskih operaterjih, ne pomeni, da bi bila prva dva lahko deležna ugodnosti.
They are of the opinion that there are two means by which the existence of a selective advantage could be demonstrated:
Po njihovem mnenju je obstoj selektivne ugodnosti mogoče dokazati na dva načina:
Either by showing that an R&E valuation of telecommunications operators other than BT and Kingston would have yielded a lower rateable value than that derived from the rental method, so as to demonstrate that the R&E method is flawed or systematically understates value;
s ponazoritvijo, da bi z vrednotenjem prejemkov in izdatkov telekomunikacijskih operaterjev, ki niso BT in Kingston, dosegli nižjo obdavčljivo vrednost, kot bi izhajala iz metode najemnine, torej tako, da se dokaže, da je metoda prejemkov in izdatkov napačna ali da sistematično daje prenizko vrednost;
Or by showing that, using correct and relevant comparisons, other telecommunications operators had a disproportionately high rateable value when compared with BT and Kingston.
ali s ponazoritvijo, pri kateri se uporabijo natančne in ustrezne primerjave, da so imeli drugi telekomunikacijski operaterji nesorazmerno visoko obdavčljivo vrednost v primerjavi z BT in Kingstonom.
In order to establish point (a), it would be necessary to carry out an R&E valuation of the other telecommunications operators in order to see whether comparable results were obtained under the R&E method and under the rental method.
Da bi dokazali točko (a), bi bilo nujno treba izvesti vrednotenje prejemkov in izdatkov drugih telekomunikacijskih operaterjev, da bi videli, ali so bili po metodi prejemkov in izdatkov ter po metodi najemnine doseženi primerljivi rezultati.
None of the telecommunications operators has undertaken such an exercise and the UK authorities assume that if indeed the valuation of their network had been lower under the R&E method, members of Altnet and Vtesse would have raised this point.
Nobeden od telekomunikacijskih operaterjev se tega ni lotil in organi Združenega kraljestva domnevajo, da bi člani Altneta in Vtesse na to opozorili, če bi bilo vrednotenje njihovega omrežja po metodi prejemkov in izdatkov res nižje.
As to the VOA, it does not have these telecommunications operators' business plans.
VOA nima poslovnih načrtov teh telekomunikacijskih operaterjev.
Therefore, it is not in a position to assess their anticipated receipts and expenditure deriving from the occupation of their network, and determine the rent they would be ready to pay for it under the R&E method.
Zato ne more oceniti njihovih pričakovanih prejemkov in izdatkov, ki izhajajo iz posesti njihovega omrežja, in določiti najemnine, ki bi jo bili zanjo pripravljeni plačati po metodi prejemkov in izdatkov.
Concerning point (b), the UK authorities note that Vtesse and the Commission suggested comparing the percentage of receipts paid by Vtesse in rates compared with the percentage of receipts paid by BT and Kingston.
V zvezi s točko (b) organi Združenega kraljestva opozarjajo, da sta Vtesse in Komisija predlagala primerjavo deleža prejemkov, ki ga je Vtesse plačal z davkom, z deležem prejemkov, ki sta jih plačala BT in Kingston.
The UK authorities first submit that this ratio is irrelevant.
Organi Združenega kraljestva najprej navajajo, da to razmerje ni pomembno.
They argue that rates are a tax on the value of property, not a tax on receipts, profits or capital gains.
Po njihovih trditvah poslovni davek pomeni davek na vrednost premoženja, ne davek na prejemke, dobičke ali kapitalske dobičke.
The value of a property is not a function of the turnover of the particular occupier: two businesses may occupy identical properties, yet their turnover could be very different depending on the nature and success of their business.
Vrednost premoženja ni odvisna od prometa posameznega uporabnika: dve podjetji imata lahko v posesti povsem enako premoženje, vendar imata glede na vrsto in uspešnost svojega poslovanja lahko zelo različen promet.
Even tenants in the same area of business may have dramatically different turnovers depending on their efficiency.
Celo najemniki na istem poslovnem področju imajo lahko zelo različen promet, odvisno od njihove učinkovitosti.
Consequently, revenue is no indication as to the rent which would be arrived at in the ‘haggling of the market’ and placing any weight on an alleged disparity between the percentage of receipts spent on rates is wrong.
Zato prihodek ni znak za to, kakšna najemnina bi bila dosežena ob „barantanju na trgu“, in pripisovanje kakršnega koli pomena domnevni neenakosti med deleži prejemkov, porabljenih za davek, je zmotno.
In any case, the UK authorities submit that the correct rates/receipts ratio for BT and Kingston in the UK were the following :
Kakor koli že, organi Združenega kraljestva menijo, da je bilo pravilno razmerje med davkom in prejemki za BT in Kingston v Združenem kraljestvu naslednje:
The UK authorities explained that the difference between the ratio that they obtain for BT and the ratio calculated by Vtesse for BT (2 %) can be explained by the fact that Vtesse compared BT's receipts in the UK with its network rateable value in England and Wales.
Organi Združenega kraljestva so pojasnili, da je razliko med razmerjem, ki ga dobijo za BT, in razmerjem, ki ga je za BT izračunal Vtesse, (2 %), mogoče razložiti z dejstvom, da je Vtesse primerjal prejemke BT v Združenem kraljestvu z njegovo obdavčljivo vrednostjo v Angliji in Walesu.
Vtesse failed to take into account separately assessed properties and the rateable value of BT's hereditament in Scotland and Northern Ireland.
Vtesse ni upošteval ločeno ocenjenega premoženja ter obdavčljive vrednosti nepremičnin BT na Škotskem in v Severni Irski.
The difference between the ratios provided by Vtesse and the UK authorities can be further explained by the fact that the UK authorities calculated the rates/receipts ratio by using revised revenues for BT and Kingston which were adjusted to take account of non-relevant revenues and were normalised to reflect projected future trends.
Razliko v razmerjih, ki so ju navedli Vtesse in organi Združenega kraljestva, je nadalje mogoče razložiti z dejstvom, da so organi Združenega kraljestva pri izračunu razmerja med davkom in prejemki za BT in Kingston uporabili popravljene prihodke, ki so bili prilagojeni, da bi se upoštevali nepomembni prihodki, in normalizirani, da bi se odražalo načrtovano prihodnje gibanje.
In any case, even if the percentage-of -receipts approach was to have any validity, the UK authorities claim that the figures provided by Vtesse and used by the Commission in the decision to initiate the procedure, do not show the existence of an advantage to BT.
Kakor koli že, tudi če bi pristop na podlagi deleža prejemkov imel kakršno koli veljavo, organi Združenega kraljestva trdijo, da številke, ki jih je predložil Vtesse in jih je Komisija uporabila v odločitvi o sprožitvi postopka, ne dokazujejo obstoja ugodnosti za BT.
On the contrary, they note that, when all the Altnet telecommunication operators as a whole are compared with BT, the percentage of receipts shows that BT does not pay less than the Altnet operators.
Nasprotno, opozarjajo, da delež prejemkov, če vse telekomunikacijske operaterje Altneta kot celoto primerjamo z BT, pokaže, da BT ne plačuje manj kot operaterji Altneta.
In the final year of the 2000 list, BT had about 70 % of the total fixed telecoms rateable value and about 71,6 % of call and access revenues and a smaller percentage of other fixed market revenues.
V zadnjem letu seznama iz leta 2000 je BT imel približno 70 % skupnega zneska obdavčljive vrednosti fiksnih telekomunikacijskih operaterjev, približno 71,6 % prihodkov od klicev in dostopa ter manjši delež drugih prihodkov trga fiksne telefonije.
According to the UK authorities, these figures show that there is no systemic problem with the valuation in the 1995 and 2000 lists.
Po navedbah organov Združenega kraljestva te številke dokazujejo, da z vrednotenjem na seznamih iz leta 1995 in 2000 ni sistemskih težav.
On the question of marginal taxation, the UK authorities deny that the different way of rating additional fibres confers any advantage on BT or Kingston.
V zvezi z vprašanjem mejne obdavčitve organi Združenega kraljestva zanikajo, da bi drugačen način odmere davka na dodatna optična vlakna pomenil kakršno koli ugodnost za BT ali Kingston.
The trigger for rateability of telecommunication operators' fibres under the rental method is the lighting of the fibres.
Povod za obdavčljivost optičnih vlaken telekomunikacijskih operaterjev po metodi najemnine je priključitev optičnih vlaken.
This is not the way new fibres are treated in the case of BT/Kingston under the R&E method.
Takšna obravnava novih optičnih vlaken pa ne velja v primeru BT/Kingstona, ko se ovrednotijo po metodi prejemkov in izdatkov.
The R&E method anticipates the receipts and expenditures over the next five years.
Metoda prejemkov in izdatkov predvideva prejemke in izdatke v naslednjih petih letih.
The fibres necessary for BT's business throughout the five-year life of the list are taken into account in the assessment of the rateable value because the receipts from these fibres are included in the R&E valuation.
Optična vlakna, ki jih BT potrebuje pri poslovanju skozi celotno petletno obdobje trajanja seznama, se upoštevajo pri oceni obdavčljive vrednosti, ker so prihodki od teh optičnih vlaken vključeni v vrednotenje prejemkov in izdatkov.
Business rates are therefore payable in respect of optic fibres from the commencement date of the rating List, not merely from the day when they are lit.
Poslovni davek je za optična vlakna torej plačljiv od datuma začetka seznama za odmero davka in ne samo od dneva, ko se priključijo.
Physical additions to BT's hereditament are further taken into account by the annual revision mechanism which is based on the evolution of BT's market shares described in recitals 96 to 100.
Fizični dodatki k nepremičnini BT se nadalje upoštevajo z mehanizmom letnih popravkov, ki temelji na gibanju tržnih deležev BT, opisanem v uvodnih izjavah 96 do 100.
The UK Authorities acknowledge that the valuation methods, of necessity, require a different approach to the treatment of the lighting of additional fibres, but underline that the end result of the valuation exercise in both cases is that the value of the fibres to the occupier is reflected in the rateable value.
Organi Združenega kraljestva priznavajo, da metode vrednotenja nujno zahtevajo drugačen pristop do obravnave priključitve dodatnih optičnih vlaken, vendar poudarjajo, da je končni rezultat izvedbe vrednotenja v obeh primerih ta, da se vrednost optičnih vlaken do uporabnika odraža v obdavčljivi vrednosti.
V. COMMENTS FROM OFCOM
V. PRIPOMBE URADA OFCOM
OFCOM is the independent regulator and competition authority for the UK communications industries.
OFCOM je neodvisni regulativni organ in organ, pristojen za konkurenco, ki ureja komunikacijsko industrijo v Združenem kraljestvu.
The comments from the UK authorities were provided by the UK central government and do not represent the views of OFCOM.
Pripombe organov Združenega kraljestva je predložila centralna vlada Združenega kraljestva in ne pomenijo stališč urada OFCOM.
As a result, the Commission asked OFCOM to provide its comments on the decision to initiate the procedure by letter dated 26 July 2005.
Zato je Komisija v dopisu z dne 26. julija 2005 OFCOM zaprosila, da predloži svoje pripombe v zvezi z odločitvijo o sprožitvi postopka.
They were provided by OFCOM by letter dated 21 September 2005.
OFCOM jih je posredoval v dopisu z dne 21. septembra 2005.
OFCOM considered the extent to which differences in methodology and practice may have effects on the conditions of competition.
OFCOM je preučil, v kakšnem obsegu lahko razlike v metodologiji in praksi vplivajo na konkurenčne pogoje.
Its general conclusion was that the non-domestic rating system is currently not having an adverse effect on the conditions of competition in the telecommunications market.
Njegova splošna ugotovitev je bila, da sistem za odmero davka na nestanovanjsko lastnino trenutno ne škoduje konkurenčnim pogojem na trgu telekomunikacij.
Concerning the rates/revenue ratio, OFCOM is of the view that this ratio is not pertinent for assessing the fairness of the non-domestic rates system.
V zvezi z razmerjem med davkom in prihodki OFCOM meni, da to razmerje ni ustrezno za oceno pravičnosti sistema davka na nestanovanjsko lastnino.
It points out that rates are related to the expected market rents, which are likely to reflect the efficient use of the assets.
Poudarja, da je davek povezan s pričakovanimi najemninami na trgu, ki bi verjetno odražale učinkovito uporabo premoženja.
If an asset is used inefficiently by a firm, rates may be a significant proportion of its revenues.
Če kako podjetje premoženje uporabi neučinkovito, davek lahko pomeni precejšen delež njegovih prihodkov.
For example, the rates/revenues ratio for a fibre network may depend on the amount of data for which it is used.
Razmerje med davkom in prihodki za omrežje iz optičnih vlaken je lahko na primer odvisno od količine podatkov, za katere se uporablja.
Differences in the rates/revenue ratio of different companies may thus simply reflect differences in the value of the services they provide to customers through similar rateable assets.
Razlike v razmerjih med davkom in prihodki različnih podjetij torej lahko preprosto odražajo razlike v vrednosti storitev, ki se uporabnikom zagotavljajo s podobnim obdavčljivim premoženjem.
Furthermore, OFCOM calculated the rates/revenue ratio for a certain number of telecommunications operators in the United Kingdom:
Poleg tega je OFCOM izračunal razmerje med davkom in prihodki za več telekomunikacijskih operaterjev v Združenem kraljestvu:
2005 rate liability (GBP million)
davčna obveznost v letu 2005 (v milijonih GBP)
2005 revenues
prihodki v letu 2005
Rates/revenue
Davek/prihodki
OFCOM also calculated Vtesse's ratio for 2003, the only year for which it had available figures.
OFCOM je izračunal tudi razmerje Vtesse za leto 2003, edino leto, za katero je imel razpoložljive podatke.
This ratio was 2,1 %.
To razmerje je znašalo 2,1 %.
These figures show that the rates/revenue ratio differs significantly and with no clear pattern to volumes of revenues.
Te številke dokazujejo, da je razmerje med davkom in prihodki zelo različno in brez jasnega vzorca, kar zadeva obseg prihodkov.
OFCOM concluded that not only is this ratio a flawed methodology for assessing the fairness of the non-domestic rating system, but the allegation that BT generally pays a smaller amount in rates compared to its revenues than its competitors appears to be false.
OFCOM je ugotovil, da to razmerje ni samo napačna metodologija za ocenjevanje pravičnosti sistema za odmero davka na nestanovanjsko lastnino, ampak se zdi zmotna tudi trditev, da BT na splošno plačuje manjši znesek davka glede na svoje prihodke kot njegovi konkurenti.
OFCOM underlines the difficulty of making appropriate comparisons between very different telecommunications operators (e.g. the average rateable value of a route kilometre of a fibre network can be very different according to the characteristics of the network to which it belongs and to the number of lit fibres on that route).
OFCOM poudarja, kako težko je ustrezno primerjati zelo različne telekomunikacijske operaterje (npr. povprečna obdavčljiva vrednost kilometra povezav za usmerjanje v omrežju iz optičnih vlaken je lahko zelo različna glede na značilnosti omrežja, ki mu pripada, in število priključenih optičnih vlaken na tej povezavi za usmerjanje).
It nevertheless suggested some alternative ways of comparing BT's taxation with that of its competitors.
Kljub temu je predlagal nekatere alternativne načine za primerjavo obdavčitve BT z obdavčitvijo njegovih konkurentov.
For instance, it calculated the ratio rateable value/connection for BT and the three companies which are most similar to it regarding the local access network, i.e. Kingston, NTL and Telewest.
Izračunal je na primer razmerje med obdavčljivo vrednostjo in priključkom za BT ter tri družbe, ki so mu najbolj podobne glede na omrežje za lokalni dostop, tj. Kingston, NTL in Telewest.
All four are primarily local access providers.
Vsi štirje so predvsem ponudniki lokalnega dostopa.
BT and Kingston are valued on the basis of the R&E basis and NTL and Telewest are valued on a method derived from the contractor's basis method.
BT in Kingston sta ovrednotena na podlagi prejemkov in izdatkov, NTL in Telewest pa sta ovrednotena po metodi, ki je izpeljana iz metode pogodbenikove osnove.
The results of OFCOM's calculations are shown in the table below.
Rezultati izračunov urada OFCOM so prikazani v spodnji razpredelnici.
In the view of OFCOM, these rateable values per connections do not vary much from one operator to the other.
Po mnenju urada OFCOM se te obdavčljive vrednosti na priključke bistveno ne razlikujejo od enega operaterja do drugega.
Rateable value/connection
Obdavčljiva vrednost/priključek
Therefore, in general, OFCOM concludes that there is little evidence to support an argument that BT pays significantly less than fibre backbone operators on any measure.
Zato OFCOM na splošno ugotavlja, da je na voljo malo dokazov v podporo trditvi, da BT za kateri koli ukrep plačuje precej manj kot operaterji hrbtenice iz optičnih vlaken.
OFCOM also analysed whether the rating system introduces undue asymmetry in terms of marginal rate liability.
OFCOM je tudi preučil, ali sistem za odmero davka uvaja neupravičeno nesorazmerje, kar zadeva mejno obveznost plačila davka.
On this point, OFCOM notes that the R&E method uses projected figures for revenues and costs and therefore conceptually includes any network build required to meet these business plans.
V zvezi s tem OFCOM navaja, da se pri metodi prejemkov in izdatkov uporabljajo predvidene številke za prihodke in stroške, zato pojmovno vključuje vsakršno dograditev omrežja, potrebno za izpolnitev teh poslovnih načrtov.
The R&E basis is not limited to the state of BT's network at the start of the five-year period but reflects the necessary changes that will be made to it over the following five years, with annual reassessments to capture and rate material changes to BT's hereditament.
Podlaga za izračun prejemkov in izdatkov ni omejena na stanje omrežja BT na začetku petletnega obdobja, ampak odraža potrebne spremembe omrežja v naslednjih petih letih, z letnimi ponovnimi ocenami, da se upoštevajo in obdavčijo bistvene spremembe nepremičnin BT.
In the view of OFCOM, although the incremental charge is more apparent to smaller operators, as each fibre lit leads to a specific additional rates charge, this does not mean that BT's rateable value does not include amounts for similar changes.
OFCOM meni, da čeprav je dodatna obremenitev bolj očitna pri manjših operaterjih, ker vsako priključeno optično vlakno povzroči posebno obremenitev dodatnega davka, to še ne pomeni, da obdavčljiva vrednost BT ne vključuje zneskov za podobne spremembe.
OFCOM concluded that it has no evidence to suggest that, unlike telecommunication operators assessed under the rental method, BT pays no additional rates when it lights a fibre.
OFCOM je ugotovil, da nima dokazov v prid domnevi, da BT v nasprotju s telekomunikacijskimi operaterji, ocenjenimi po metodi najemnine, ne plača dodatnega davka za priključitev optičnega vlakna.
The system would appear to provide a materially symmetrical outcome in the long term in each case, albeit through different routes and with low levels of transparency.
Zdi se, da bi sistem v vsakem primeru dolgoročno zagotovil bistveno simetričen rezultat, čeprav po različnih poteh in z nizkimi ravnmi preglednosti.
State aid assessment pursuant to Article 87(1) EC
Ocena državne pomoči na podlagi člena 87(1) ES