natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
These valuation methods have the same objective, namely the ascertainment of the hypothetical tenancy and should all, properly applied, yield the same result.
Cilj teh metod vrednotenja je enak, in sicer določitev hipotetične najemnine, in na podlagi pravilne uporabe morajo vse dati enak rezultat.
The existence of several methods is meant to cater for the wide range of circumstances to which rates are applied.
Več metod je na voljo za to, da se upošteva širok razpon okoliščin, v katerih se uporablja davek.
The selection of the appropriate valuation method is not a discretionary decision: it will depend on the nature of the hereditament and the nature of the available evidence.
Izbira ustrezne metode vrednotenja ni odločitev na podlagi proste presoje: odvisna je od vrste nepremičnine in vrste razpoložljivih dokazil.
Thus, for instance, if there is no profit motive (hospitals, schools) for occupation, the R&E method is not applicable and the VOA is likely to judge that the most appropriate method is the contractor's basis.
Če torej na primer ni pridobitnega razloga (bolnišnice, šole) za posest, se metoda prejemkov in izdatkov ne uporabi in VOA lahko presodi, da je najprimernejša metoda pogodbenikove osnove.
Choice of the method applied to BT and Kingston
Izbira metode, ki se je uporabila pri BT in Kingstonu
The UK authorities explain that the R&E method was the only one that was available to assess BT's and Kingston's hereditament.
Organi Združenega kraljestva pojasnijo, da je bila metoda prejemkov in izdatkov edina razpoložljiva metoda za oceno nepremičnin BT in Kingstona.
They claim that the VOA's team of independent experts that worked on assessing their hereditament concluded for all valuation periods, including 2005-2010, that there was not enough evidence to assess the rateable value of BT's and Kingston's networks on the basis of the rental method.
Po njihovih trditvah je skupina neodvisnih strokovnjakov iz agencije VOA, ki je ocenjevala njune nepremičnine, za vsa obdobja vrednotenja, vključno z obdobjem 2005–2010, ugotovila, da ni dovolj dokazil, da bi obdavčljivo vrednost omrežij BT in Kingstona ocenili na podlagi metode najemnine.
This finding was accepted by the Valuation Tribunal in the case at hand.
To ugotovitev je Valuation Tribunal v obravnavanem primeru sprejel.
They further claim that the R&E method is the only one that could reflect the unique advantage of ubiquity which BT enjoys.
Trdijo tudi, da se samo z metodo prejemkov in izdatkov lahko odraža edinstvena prednost splošne razširjenosti, ki jo uživa BT.
The UK authorities claim that the rental method was not applicable to BT and Kingston.
Organi Združenega kraljestva trdijo, da pri BT in Kingstonu ni bilo mogoče uporabiti metode najemnine.
On this point, they first emphasise that the question of the availability of rental evidence has to be assessed at the time when the valuation was conducted.
V zvezi s tem najprej poudarijo, da je o vprašanju razpoložljivosti dokazil o najemnini treba presoditi ob izvedbi vrednotenja.
Thus, for instance, the possibility of applying the rental method for the period 1995-2000 can be considered only on the basis of information that was available at the ‘antecedent valuation date’, i.e. 1 April 1993.
Tako se na primer o možnosti uporabe metode najemnine za obdobje 1995–2000 lahko presoja samo na podlagi podatkov, ki so bili na voljo na „datum predhodnega vrednotenja“, tj. 1. aprila 1993.
Therefore, the UK authorities claim that third parties and the Commission are wrong to assume that market evidence that is now available is relevant to the question as to whether the 1995 and 2000 lists could have been compiled on the basis of the rental method.
Zato organi Združenega kraljestva trdijo, da tretje stranke in Komisija napak domnevajo, da so sedaj razpoložljivi tržni dokazi pomembni za vprašanje, ali bi se sezame za leti 1995 in 2000 lahko sestavili na podlagi metode najemnine.
Therefore, with respect to the 1995 lists, only information available in 1993 could be taken into account.
Zato bi se v zvezi s seznami za leto 1995 lahko upoštevale samo informacije, ki so bile na voljo leta 1993.
In its decision to initiate the procedure, the Commission suggested two possible sources of rental evidence: either the rent received by BT when renting out its own infrastructure or transfer prices between BT's retail business and BT's wholesale business.
Komisija je v svoji odločitvi o sprožitvi postopka predlagala dva možna vira dokazil o najemnini: najemnino, ki jo je BT prejel, ko je lastno infrastrukturo oddal v najem, ali cene prenosa med maloprodajno in veleprodajno enoto BT.
The UK authorities claim that neither of those approaches was available to the VOA in 1993.
Organi Združenega kraljestva trdijo, da VOA leta 1993 ni imela na voljo nobene od navedenih metod.
In 1993, BT was not renting out any significant part of its infrastructure and it was not structured in a way that separated its retail and wholesale businesses.
BT leta 1993 ni oddal v najem nobenega bistvenega dela svoje infrastrukture in ni bil strukturiran tako, da bi bili njegova maloprodajna in veleprodajna enota ločeni.
Concerning the 2000 list, based on information available in 1998, the UK authorities admit that by that date, there was limited rental evidence from fibre optic networks which started to be provided to operators under so-called Indefeasible Rights of Use (IRU) contracts.
V zvezi s seznamom za leto 2000, ki temelji na razpoložljivih informacijah iz leta 1998, organi Združenega kraljestva priznavajo, da so do navedenega datuma obstajala omejena dokazila o najemnini omrežij iz optičnih vlaken, ki so se operaterjem začela zagotavljati v okviru tako imenovanih pogodb o neodvzemljivih pravicah do uporabe (Indefeasible Rights of Use (IRU)).
However, that evidence was limited and applied only to fibre optic networks used for carriage of high volume services, and was therefore relevant to an extremely limited proportion of BT's hereditament.
Vendar so bila navedena dokazila omejena in so veljala samo za omrežja iz optičnih vlaken, ki so se uporabljala za prenos obsežnih storitev, zato so bila pomembna samo za zelo omejen delež nepremičnin BT.
They also admit that there were separate retail and wholesale divisions in 1998, but the access business, which is an essential part of BT's activities, was operated on an ‘end to end’ basis with no transfers to the other divisions.
Priznavajo tudi, da sta leta 1998 obstajali ločeni maloprodajna in veleprodajna enota, vendar se je dejavnost dostopa, ki je bistven del dejavnosti BT, izvajala na podlagi „od začetka do konca“ brez prenosov na druge enote.
Therefore, transfer payments could not be used to value the whole of BT's network.
Zato transferjev ni bilo mogoče uporabiti pri vrednotenju celotnega omrežja BT.
As to the 2005 list, the same remarks as above apply.
V zvezi s seznamom za leto 2005 veljajo enake opombe kot zgoraj.
The UK authorities also deny that, contrary to the suggestion made by Altnet, tariffs for local loop unbundling provide any rental evidence on the basis of which BT's hereditament could have been assessed.
Organi Združenega kraljestva tudi zanikajo, in sicer v nasprotju z domnevo Altneta, da bi bile lahko tarife za razvezavo krajevne zanke kakršno koli dokazilo o najemnini, na podlagi katerega bi se lahko ocenile nepremičnine BT.
For instance, the Wholesale Line Rental (WLR) tariff was available from August 2002.
Tarifa za medoperaterski najem vodov (Wholesale Line Rental) je bila na primer na voljo od avgusta 2002.
It is a product which BT is obliged to provide to other telecommunications operators, and which enables them to offer both line rental and calls to customers over BT's local network.
Gre za storitev, ki jo mora BT obvezno zagotavljati drugim telekomunikacijskim operaterjem in ki slednjim omogoči, da uporabnikom ponudijo najem vodov in klice prek lokalnega omrežja BT.
However, the payment made by the telecommunications provider to BT is not equivalent to a rent for the local network.
Vendar plačilo, ki ga telekomunikacijski ponudnik izvrši BT, ni enakovredno najemnini za lokalno omrežje.
It is a payment for a service, since BT has to provide, inter alia, maintenance of the line, exchange accommodation, billing and R&D, fault repair, pair gain equipment, and power.
Gre za plačilo storitve, saj mora BT med drugim zagotoviti vzdrževanje voda, namestitev telefonske centrale, zaračunavanje ter raziskave in razvoj, popravilo okvar, opremo za nadparni sistem in električno energijo.
Therefore, the UK authorities claim that, contrary to Vtesse and Altnet's assumption, it cannot be equated with a rent per line for the local loops.
Zato organi Združenega kraljestva trdijo, da ga v nasprotju z domnevo Vtesse in Altneta ne moremo enačiti z najemnino posameznega voda za krajevne zanke.
They come to the same conclusion with respect to the Calls and Access tariff, which was a precursor to the WLR product, was available from 1998 and covered the same services as the WLR.
Enako sklepajo v zvezi s tarifo za klice in dostop, predhodnico storitve medoperaterskega zakupa vodov, ki je bila na voljo od leta 1998 in je zajemala enake storitve kot medoperaterski zakup vodov.
Furthermore, BT's wholesale line rental tariff and local loop unbundling fee are regulated by OFCOM.
Poleg tega tarifo za medoperaterski zakup vodov BT in pristojbino za razvezavo krajevne zanke zakonsko ureja OFCOM.
They are not open market rents and as such little weight can be given to these tariffs as evidence of rental value.
Ker ne gre za najemnine na odprtem trgu, imajo navedene tarife kot takšne lahko le majhno težo kot dokazila o najemni vrednosti.
Therefore, the VOA claims to have no rental evidence on the essential parts of the networks of BT and Kingston, i.e. their local access networks.
Zato VOA trdi, da nima dokazil o najemnini za bistvena dela omrežij BT in Kingstona, tj. njuni omrežji za lokalni dostop.
Furthermore, the UK authorities explained that rental evidence used when applying the rental method to telecommunications operators other than BT and Kingston cannot be used to value the hereditament of these two firms.
Poleg tega so organi Združenega kraljestva pojasnili, da se dokazila o najemnini, uporabljena ob uporabi metode najemnine pri telekomunikacijskih operaterjih, ki niso bili BT in Kingston, ne morejo uporabiti za določitev vrednosti nepremičnin teh dveh podjetij.
BT and Kingston, on the one hand, and other telecommunication operators, on the other hand, are not remotely comparable.
BT in Kingston na eni strani ter drugi komunikacijski operaterji na drugi še zdaleč niso primerljivi.
The networks of BT and Kingston are primarily local access networks, serving millions of individuals in the case of BT, while the networks of most other telecommunication operators are primarily core networks serving a small number of high value, high volume customers.
Omrežji BT in Kingstona sta predvsem omrežji za lokalni dostop, ki ju v primeru BT uporabljajo milijoni posameznikov, medtem ko so omrežja večine drugih telekomunikacijskih operaterjev zlasti osrednja omrežja, ki jih uporablja majhno število velikih zelo pomembnih uporabnikov.
The value of a hereditament is influenced by a number of factors including its function, its physical layout, its extent and the regulatory environment under which it operates.
Na vrednost nepremičnine vplivajo številni dejavniki, na primer njena namembnost, fizična podoba, obseg in zakonodajno okolje, v okviru katerega deluje.
Thus, given the differences in the hereditaments and the lack of comparability, rental evidence from telecommunications operators, for instance on their optic fibre network, cannot be applied directly to BT/Kingston.
Zato se glede na razlike med nepremičninami in pomanjkanje primerljivosti dokazil o najemnini telekomunikacijskih operaterjev, na primer za njihovo omrežje iz optičnih vlaken, ne more neposredno uporabiti pri BT/Kingstonu.
For the same reasons, the UK authorities claim that, contrary to the suggestion made by the Commission in its decision to initiate the procedure, rental evidence from Cable TV companies cannot be applied to BT or Kingston.
Zaradi enakih razlogov organi Združenega kraljestva trdijo, da se v nasprotju z domnevo, ki jo je Komisija izrazila v svoji odločitvi o sprožitvi postopka, dokazila o najemnini podjetij za kabelsko televizijo ne morejo uporabiti pri BT ali Kingstonu.
As to the suggestion that parts of BT's hereditament could have been valued by reference to rental evidence derived from other networks and then on an R&E method for the remainder, the UK authorities claim that such an approach was not feasible.
V zvezi z domnevo, da bi se vrednost delov nepremičnin BT lahko določila z upoštevanjem dokazil o najemnini, ki izhajajo iz drugih omrežij, preostanek pa nato po metodi prejemkov in izdatkov, organi Združenega kraljestva trdijo, da takšen pristop ni bil izvedljiv.
Such an approach would pre-suppose that there are distinct physical parts of the BT network for each of the different businesses in which BT is engaged.
Takšen pristop bi predvideval, da ima omrežje BT različne fizične dele za vsako od različnih dejavnosti, s katerimi se ukvarja BT.
However, the UK authorities note that according to British case-law on the application of business rates, contiguous property in the same occupation, such as BT's and Kingston's networks, must be valued as a single hereditament.
Vendar organi Združenega kraljestva navajajo, da se mora v skladu z britansko sodno prakso o odmeri poslovnega davka sosednje premoženje v isti posesti, kakršen je primer omrežij BT in Kingstona, ovrednotiti kot ena nepremičnina.
Disaggregating property in single occupation would introduce valuation distortions, since the sum of the value of the parts of a property rarely equates to the value of the whole.
Razdruževanje premoženja v isti uporabi bi povzročilo izkrivljanje pri vrednotenjih, saj je vsota vrednosti delov premoženja redko enaka vrednosti celote.
More specifically, to seek to disaggregate BT's core trunk route, high volume, fibre optic network, which competes with Vtesse's business, and to assess its rateable value by reference to rents paid by competing telecommunications providers is not possible.
Natančneje, ni si mogoče prizadevati za razdružitev osrednje glavne prometnice BT, omrežja iz optičnih vlaken velikega obsega, ki konkurira dejavnosti Vtesse, in oceniti njegovo obdavčljivo vrednost ob upoštevanju najemnin, ki so jih plačali konkurenčni ponudniki telekomunikacijskih storitev.
That is because that same infrastructure is also used by low volume telephony services provided to BT's 29 million domestic customers.
To pa zato, ker ista infrastruktura uporablja tudi za telefonske storitve majhnega obsega, ki se zagotavljajo 29 milijonom uporabnikov BT iz gospodinjstev.
BT's or Kingston's networks are physically incapable of being divided into self-contained units capable of being separately let or occupied, by reason of their physical and functional integration.
Omrežji BT ali Kingstona je zaradi njune fizične in funkcionalne povezanosti fizično nemogoče razdeliti v neodvisni enoti, ki bi se ju lahko ločeno oddalo v najem ali uporabljalo.
In any case, even if it were possible to value separate parts of BT's and Kingston's hereditaments and value them under a different method than the R&E method, the problem would remain of how to value the remainder, since the R&E method can be applied only in respect of the whole of those undertakings' networks.
Kakor koli že, tudi če bi bilo mogoče ovrednotiti ločene dele nepremičnin BT in Kingstona ter njihovo vrednost določiti z metodo, ki ni metoda prejemkov in izdatkov, bi se še naprej zastavljalo vprašanje, kako ovrednotiti preostanek, saj se metoda prejemkov in izdatkov lahko uporablja samo v zvezi s celotnima omrežjema navedenih podjetij.
The application of the R&E method to BT and Kingston.
Uporaba metode prejemkov in izdatkov pri BT in Kingstonu
The UK authorities provided detailed explanations on the way the R&E method is applied to BT and Kingston.
Organi Združenega kraljestva so podali podrobna pojasnila, kako se je metoda prejemkov in izdatkov uporabila pri BT in Kingstonu.
Valuation of BT
Vrednotenje BT
The valuations are carried out by independent experts in accordance with the general rules on the application of the R & E method.
Vrednotenja izvajajo neodvisni strokovnjaki, in sicer v skladu s splošnimi pravili o uporabi metode prejemkov in izdatkov.
Although the modelling and the resulting calculations are complex, the following paragraphs provide a brief overview on how the valuation was done for the 1995-2000 period.
Čeprav so modeliranje in iz tega izhajajoči izračuni zapleteni, je v naslednjih odstavkih kratek pregled, kako je bilo vrednotenje izvedeno za obdobje 1995–2000.
The R & E valuation takes the expected receipts, which are relevant to the rateable occupation of BT's hereditament, and deducts the relevant expenses.
Vrednotenje prejemkov in izdatkov upošteva pričakovane prejemke, ki so pomembni za obdavčljivo posest nepremičnin BT, od katerih se odštejejo zadevni izdatki.
Specialist consultants (National Economic Research Associates — NERA) were commissioned by the VOA to prepare a model to provide an estimate of future revenues and operating costs over a five-year period arising from occupation of the BT Central List hereditaments in England & Wales, together with the remainder of the network in Scotland and Northern Ireland.
Strokovnim svetovalcem (National Economic Research Associates – NERA) je VOA naročila pripravo modela, s katerim bi dobili oceno prihodnjih prihodkov in stroškov poslovanja v petletnem obdobju, ki izhajajo iz posesti nepremičnin BT z osrednjega seznama v Angliji in Walesu, skupaj s preostalim delom omrežja na Škotskem in v Severni Irski.
A summary description of the NERA model and underlying spreadsheets for the 1995, 2000 and 2005 valuations were submitted by the UK authorities.
Organi Združenega kraljestva so predložili povzetek opisa modela, ki ga je pripravila NERA, in razpredelnice, ki so bile podlaga za vrednotenja v letih 1995, 2000 in 2005.
The objective of the NERA model was to predict the revenues and operating costs likely to arise from the BT network throughout the United Kingdom, in the context of the rating hypothesis over a five year period.
Cilj modela, ki ga je pripravila NERA, je bil predvideti prihodke in stroške poslovanja, ki bi lahko izhajali iz omrežja BT po vsem Združenem kraljestvu, in sicer v okviru predpostavke o odmeri davka v petletnem obdobju.
That hypothesis envisages a letting of the rateable portion of the BT network at 1 April 1993, but having regard to its physical state and that of competing networks and the remainder of the physical environment as at 1 April 1995.
Navedena predpostavka predvideva oddajo v najem obdavčljivega dela omrežja BT na dan 1. aprila 1993, vendar upošteva njegovo fizično stanje in stanje konkurenčnih omrežij ter preostali del fizičnega okolja na dan 1. aprila 1995.
The NERA model proceeded from the basis of actual revenues and operating costs, arising in the year preceding the antecedent valuation date, as these would be known to the bidders for the hypothetical tenancy.
Model, ki ga je pripravila NERA, izhaja iz dejanskih prihodkov in stroškov poslovanja, nastalih v letu pred datumom predhodnega vrednotenja, saj bi bili ti poznani ponudnikom za hipotetični najem.
Observations of a long series of past statistics were used to derive elasticities which were used to forecast movements in the total telecoms market and BT's share thereof over a five-year period.
S spremljanjem dolge vrste predhodnih statističnih podatkov so bile dobljene elastičnosti, ki so se uporabile za napovedovanje gibanj na celotnem trgu telekomunikacij in deleža BT na njem v petletnem obdobju.
In the case of BT, the VOA decided to use forecast costs and revenues over a five-year period rather than the usual one-year period.
V primeru BT se je VOA odločila, da bo namesto predvidenih stroškov in prihodkov v običajnem enoletnem obdobju uporabila predvidene stroške in prihodke v petletnem obdobju.
The UK authorities explained that in certain circumstances, the application of the R&E method may involve considering levels of profitability over a number of future years if performance over a single year is not likely to be typical of the future.
Organi Združenega kraljestva so pojasnili, da uporaba metode prejemkov in izdatkov v nekaterih okoliščinah lahko vključuje znatne stopnje donosnosti v več prihodnjih letih, če delovanje v enem samem letu najverjetneje ne bi bilo značilno za v prihodnje.
In the case of BT, the VOA anticipated that, viewed from the antecedent valuation date (‘AVD’), the future pattern of profitability would be affected by the prospect of increased competition, regulatory price control, a significant growth in competitors' networks and changes in the types of services offered.
V primeru BT je VOA pričakovala, da bodo z vidika datuma predhodnega vrednotenja na prihodnji vzorec donosnosti vplivali pričakovana povečana konkurenca, predpisani nadzor cen, precejšnja rast konkurenčnih omrežij in spremembe vrst ponujenih storitev.
For these reasons, an approach based on anticipated profitability over a five year period was necessary to value the rent that a hypothetical tenant, looking at the AVD, would be ready to pay for BT's network over that period.
Zaradi teh razlogov je bil pristop, ki je temeljil na pričakovani donosnosti v petletnem obdobju, nujno potreben za določitev vrednosti najemnine, ki bi jo bil hipotetični najemnik na podlagi datuma predhodnega vrednotenja pripravljen plačati za omrežje BT v navedenem obdobju.
Having anticipated receipts and operating costs over five years, the next stage in the R&E valuation is a deduction of the hypothetical tenant's estimated capital expenditure over the five-year forecast period on items which do not form part of the hereditament, but which are necessary in order to earn the forecast receipts.
Na podlagi pričakovanih prejemkov in stroškov poslovanja v petih letih je naslednja faza pri vrednotenju prejemkov in izdatkov odštetje ocenjenih naložb v osnovna sredstva, ki za hipotetičnega najemnika veljajo v predvidenem petletnem obdobju, in sicer za predmete, ki niso del nepremičnin, vendar so potrebni za dosego napovedanih prejemkov.
These items fall into two categories: (a) non-rateable plant & machinery required to be procured during the five year period, whether as replacement for existing equipment or otherwise; and (b) additions to the network not in existence at 1 April 1995, but which are forecast to be made over the five-year period.
Ti predmeti so razvrščeni v dve kategoriji: (a) neobdavčljivi stroji in oprema, katerih nakup je potreben v petletnem obdobju, in sicer kot nadomestilo za obstoječo opremo ali kako drugače, in (b) dodatki k omrežju, ki jih na dan 1. april 1995 še ni bilo, vendar je predvideno, da bodo izvedeni v petletnem obdobju.
The next step is the predicted change in working capital over each of the five years of the forecast period.
Naslednji korak je predvidena sprememba gibljivih sredstev v vsakem posameznem letu napovedanega petletnega obdobja.
The annual change is deducted from receipts net of expenses and the capital expenditure described above.
Letna sprememba se odšteje od prejemkov brez izdatkov in zgoraj opisane naložbe v osnovna sredstva.
This produces a divisible balance representing the total of rent and the tenant's required cash flow.
To povzroči deljivi saldo, ki pomeni najemnino in najemnikov zahtevani denarni tok skupaj.
The next step is the estimation of the tenant's required cash flow.
Naslednji korak je ocena najemnikovega zahtevanega denarnega toka.
This is the tenant's required return on his capital at the commencement of the year, adjusted for change in that capital over the course of the year.
To je najemnikov zahtevani donos njegovega kapitala na začetku leta, prilagojen glede na spremembo navedenega kapitala med letom.
The tenant's capital at the commencement of the hypothetical tenancy consists of working capital and tangible assets, namely non-rateable plant and machinery.
Najemnikov kapital ob začetku hipotetičnega najema sestavljajo gibljiva in opredmetena sredstva, in sicer neobdavčljivi stroji in oprema.