natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
The Commission would observe that the mere fact that the tax advantages in question are exclusively reserved for companies registered in Luxembourg as exempt 1929 holding companies seems to contravene the freedom of establishment of business entities established in Luxembourg as well as being formed in other Member States.
Komisija ugotavlja, da se preprosto dejstvo, da so zadevne davčne ugodnosti rezervirane izključno za družbe, ki so v Luksemburgu registrirane kot davkov oproščene holdinške družbe 1929, zdi v nasprotju s svobodo ustanavljanja gospodarskih subjektov, ki imajo prav tako sedež v tej državi, čeprav so ustanovljeni v drugih državah članicah.
The Commission would point out in this connection that only companies established in company form in Luxembourg can benefit from the advantages afforded by the Luxembourg tax scheme to exempt 1929 holding companies and that this cannot be justified by the nature of the scheme.
Komisija v zvezi s tem ugotavlja, da lahko samo podjetja, ki so bila v obliki družbe ustanovljena v Luksemburgu, uživajo ugodnosti, ki jih luksemburški davčni sistem ponuja davkov oproščenim holdinškim družbam 1929, in da to ne more biti utemeljeno z naravo navedenega davčnega sistema.
It would appear that a foreign undertaking carrying on activities comparable to those of an exempt 1929 holding company, including through a permanent establishment, an agency or a branch of a foreign company within the meaning of Article 43 of the Treaty, cannot benefit from the advantages afforded by the exempt 1929 holding companies scheme.
Zdi se, da tuje podjetje, ki opravlja dejavnosti, primerljive z dejavnostmi davkov oproščenih holdinških družb 1929, zlasti prek stalne poslovne enote, agencije ali podružnice tuje družbe v smislu člena 43 Pogodbe, ne more uživati ugodnosti, ki jih predvideva ureditev davkov oproščenih holdinških družb 1929.
Against this background, the Commission cannot accept the Luxembourg authorities' commitment not to oppose the extension of exemption status under the Law of 31 July 1929 to include permanent establishments in Luxembourg of foreign companies which satisfy the conditions laid down in that Law.
Komisija v zvezi s tem ne more sprejeti zaveze luksemburških organov, da ne bodo nasprotovali razširitvi statusa davkov oproščene družbe na podlagi zakona z dne 31. julija 1929 na stalne poslovne enote tujih družb v Luksemburgu, ki izpolnjujejo pogoje iz zakona z dne 31. julija 1929.
Article 87(1) of the Treaty makes no distinction according to the causes or aims of state aid, but defines it in terms of its effects.
Člen 87(1) Pogodbe državnih pomoči namreč ne razlikuje glede na vzroke ali cilje, ampak jih opredeljuje glede na njihov učinek.
The Commission therefore confirms its preliminary assessment that the scheme in question places, first and foremost, foreign undertakings operating in Luxembourg which do not take the form of a Luxembourg company at a disadvantage compared with holding companies which do take the form of a Luxembourg company.
Komisija torej potrjuje svojo predhodno oceno, da zadevna ureditev postavlja v slabši položaj predvsem tuje družbe, ki delujejo v Luksemburgu in niso družbe luksemburškega prava, v primerjavi s holdinškimi družbami, ustanovljenimi v obliki družbe s sedežem v Luksemburgu.
This discrimination may therefore constitute a barrier to the freedom of establishment of foreign companies in Luxembourg contrary to the Treaty and hence incompatible with the common market.
Ta diskriminacija torej lahko ovira svobodo ustanavljanja tujih družb v Luksemburgu, kar je v nasprotju s Pogodbo in torej nezdružljivo s skupnim trgom.
The Commission would also point out in this connection that the procedure provided for in Article 88 of the Treaty must never produce a result which is contrary to other specific provisions of the Treaty.
Komisija v zvezi s tem opozarja, da rezultat postopka iz člena 88 Pogodbe nikoli ne sme biti v nasprotju z drugimi posebnimi določbami Pogodbe.
State aid, certain conditions of which contravene other provisions of the Treaty, cannot therefore be declared by the Commission to be compatible with the common market.
Komisija torej državne pomoči, katere nekatera podrobna pravila so v nasprotju z drugimi določbami Pogodbe, torej ne more razglasiti za združljivo s skupnim trgom.
In the present case, as already indicated, it would appear that the scheme in question would not benefit a foreign company operating in Luxembourg through a secondary establishment taking the form of a permanent establishment, an agency or a branch, within the meaning of Article 43 of the Treaty, taxable in Luxembourg.
Kot je bilo ugotovljeno zgoraj, se v tem primeru zdi, da zadevna ureditev ne bi koristila tuji družbi, ki v Luksemburgu deluje prek sekundarne poslovalnice v obliki stalne poslovne enote, agencije ali podružnice v smislu člena 43 Pogodbe, ki je obdavčljiva v Luksemburgu.
If a Member State grants, even indirectly, a tax advantage to undertakings having their registered office in its territory, while refusing to allow undertakings having their registered office in another Member State to benefit from that advantage, then the difference in treatment between these two categories of beneficiary is in principle prohibited by the Treaty, provided that there is no objective difference in situation between them.
Če država članica, čeprav posredno, dodeljuje davčno ugodnost podjetjem s sedežem na njenem ozemlju in hkrati isto ugodnost zavrača podjetjem s sedežem v drugi državi članici, ki pa imajo sekundarno poslovalnico v Luksemburgu, Pogodba načeloma prepoveduje različno obravnavanje teh kategorij upravičencev, če ne obstaja nobena objektivna razlika v njihovem položaju.
In the light of all the above considerations, the Commission considers that the scheme in question cannot be considered compatible with the common market.
Ob upoštevanju vseh zgornjih ugotovitev Komisija meni, da zadevne ureditve ni mogoče šteti za združljivo s skupnim trgom.
The Commission finds that the tax scheme applicable to exempt 1929 holding companies constitutes state aid within the meaning of Article 87(1) of the Treaty and that none of the exceptions provided for in Article 87(2) or (3) of the Treaty applies.
Komisija ugotavlja, da je davčna ureditev, ki se uporablja za davkov oproščene holdinške družbe 1929 v Luksemburgu, državna pomoč v smislu člena 87(1) Pogodbe in da zanjo ne velja nobeno od odstopanj iz člena 87(2) in (3) navedene pogodbe.
It also finds that, in spite of the amendments to the exempt 1929 holding companies scheme introduced by the Law of 21 June 2005, the scheme still affords all the tax advantages in question, and this despite the fact that the circle of beneficiaries under the scheme is restricted to holding companies receiving less than 5 % of their dividends from foreign companies subject to less than 11 % corporation tax and to holding companies receiving dividends from foreign companies subject to at least 11 % corporation tax or from Luxembourg companies.
Komisija tudi ugotavlja, da ureditev davkov oproščenih holdinških družb 1929 kljub spremembam, ki jih glede ureditve uvaja zakon z dne 21. junija 2005, še naprej zagotavlja vse zadevne davčne ugodnosti, čeprav je krog upravičencev do te ureditve omejen na holdinške družbe, ki prejemajo manj kot 5 % dividend od tujih družb, zavezanih največ 11-odstotnemu davku od dobička pravnih oseb, in holdinške družbe, ki prejemajo dividende, ki jih plačujejo tuje družbe, zavezane najmanj 11-odstotnemu davku od dobička pravnih oseb, ali luksemburške družbe.
The Commission concludes from this that the exempt 1929 holding companies scheme, as amended by the Law of 21 June 2005, constitutes state aid within the meaning of Article 87(1) of the Treaty and that none of the exceptions provided for in Article 87(2) or (3) of the Treaty applies.
Komisija iz tega sklepa, da je ureditev davkov oproščenih holdinških družb 1929, kakor je bila spremenjena z zakonom z dne 21. junija 2005, državna pomoč v smislu člena 87(1) Pogodbe in da zanjo ne velja nobeno od odstopanj iz člena 87(2) in (3) navedene pogodbe.
The Commission notes that the exemption granted by the 1929 legislation has not been fundamentally modified since the Treaty entered into force.
Komisija ugotavlja, da sistem oprostitve, odobren z zakonodajo iz leta 1929, ni bil bistveno spremenjen od začetka veljavnosti Pogodbe.
It considers, therefore, that the scheme in question constitutes existing aid within the meaning of point (b)(i) of Article 1 of Regulation (EC) No 659/1999.
Komisija torej meni, da je ta ureditev obstoječa pomoč v smislu člena 1(b)(i) Uredbe (ES) št. 659/1999.
The amendments to the exempt 1929 holding companies scheme provided for by the Law of 21 June 2005 do not, in its view, introduce any new aid elements and do not increase the number of beneficiaries; the measure accordingly retains its nature as existing aid.
Komisija meni, da spremembe ureditve davkov oproščenih holdinških družb 1929, ki jih določa zakon z dne 21. junija 2005, ne uvajajo novih elementov pomoči in ne povečujejo števila upravičencev; ukrep zato ohranja značaj obstoječe pomoči.
The Luxembourg authorities have argued that the Commission approved the amendments introduced by the Law of 21 June 2005 within the Council's Code of Conduct Group devoted to scrutinising harmful tax measures in the light of the Code of Conduct for Business Taxation and that, as a result, the exempt 1929 holding companies scheme is in conformity with the Treaty.
Luksemburški organi so trdili, da naj bi Komisija odobrila spremembe, ki jih uvaja zakon z dne 21. junija 2005, v okviru Skupine Sveta „Kodeks ravnanja“, odgovorne za preučitev škodljivih davčnih ukrepov z vidika Kodeksa ravnanja pri obdavčitvi podjetij, in da je zato ureditev davkov oproščenih holdinških družb 1929 v skladu s Pogodbo.
In response to this, the Commission would point out firstly that Article 87 does not exclude from its scope tax measures of any description.
Komisija najprej ugotavlja, da člen 87 ne izključuje iz svojega področja uporabe nobenih davčnih ukrepov.
Secondly, neither the Law of 31 July 1929 nor any of its amendments, including those introduced by the Law of 21 June 2005, were notified to the Commission in accordance with Article 88(3) of the Treaty.
Komisija nato ugotavlja, da niti zakon z dne 31. julija 1929 niti nobena njegova sprememba, vključno s spremembami, ki jih uvaja zakon z dne 21. junija 2005, niso bili priglašeni Komisiji v skladu s členom 88(3) Pogodbe.
Consequently, the Commission has not had occasion to decide on the compatibility of the scheme in question with the state aid rules.
Zato Komisija ni imela priložnosti odločiti o združljivosti zadevne ureditve s pravili o državni pomoči.
No conclusions can therefore be drawn from the fact that the Commission took part in the proceedings of the Code of Conduct Group, the aim of which was to examine the harmful character of the tax measures in question.
Zato ni mogoče nič sklepati iz dejstva, da je Komisija sodelovala pri delu Skupine „Kodeks ravnanja“, katere cilj je bil preučiti škodljivost zadevnega davčnega ukrepa.
Suffice it to say that the procedure for examining tax schemes from a state aid point of view is legally independent of the work of the Code of Conduct Group.
V zvezi s tem je dovolj opozoriti, da je postopek preučitve davčnih sistemov z vidika državnih pomoči pravno neodvisen od dela Skupine „Kodeks ravnanja“.
Moreover, the scope of the examination of the exempt 1929 holding companies scheme by the Code of Conduct Group was narrower than that of the present examination inasmuch as the Group focused solely on the exemption of dividends received by such companies.
Poleg tega je bilo področje uporabe ureditve davkov oproščenih holdinških družb 1929, ki jo je preučila Skupina „Kodeks ravnanja“, bolj omejeno od področja uporabe ureditve, ki je predmet te odločbe. Navedena skupina je namreč preučila izključno oprostitev davka za dividende, ki jih prejemajo davkov oproščene holdinške družbe 1929.
It follows from this that the Group's examination cannot prevent the Commission from carrying out the present assessment or call into question the Commission's finding that the exempt 1929 holding companies scheme governed by the Law of 31 July 1929, as amended by the Law of 21 June 2005, constitutes state aid incompatible with the common market within the meaning of Article 87(1) of the Treaty.
Iz tega sledi, da ta preučitev ne more preprečiti, da bi Komisija pripravila to oceno, niti izpodbijati sklepne ugotovitve Komisije, da je ureditev davkov oproščenih holdinških družb 1929, ki jo ureja zakon z dne 31. julija 1929, kakor je bil spremenjen z zakonom z dne 21. junija 2005, državna pomoč, ki je nezdružljiva s skupnim trgom v smislu člena 87(1) Pogodbe.
The Commission considers that it is necessary to put an end to the granting of the various advantages conferred by the tax exemption scheme applicable to exempt 1929 holding companies either by abolishing them or by modifying them so as to make them compatible with the common market.
Komisija meni, da je treba končati dodeljevanje različnih ugodnosti, predvidenih v davčni ureditvi oprostitve, ki se uporablja za davkov oproščene holdinške družbe 1929, tako da se jih odpravi ali spremeni tako, da bodo združljive s skupnim trgom.
As from the date of notification of this Decision, the advantages conferred by the scheme or its constituent parts may no longer be granted to new beneficiary companies registered in the form of exempt 1929 holding companies.
Od datuma uradnega obvestila o tej odločbi se ugodnosti, predvidene s to ureditvijo, ali njeni sestavni deli ne smejo več dodeljevati novim družbam upravičenkam, registriranim kot davkov oproščene holdinške družbe 1929.
To that end, the Luxembourg authorities will amend their legislation by 31 December 2006 at the latest.
Luksemburški organi bodo v ta namen spremenili zakonodajo najkasneje do 31. decembra 2006.
With regard to existing exempt 1929 holding companies which currently enjoy tax exemption under the scheme described in this Decision, the Commission acknowledges that the existing aid nature of the scheme prevents any aid granted before the date of this Decision from being recovered.
Komisija v zvezi z obstoječimi davkov oproščenimi holdinškimi družbami 1929, ki sedaj uživajo ugodnost sistema davčne oprostitve, opisanega v tej odločbi, priznava, da značaj obstoječe pomoči ureditve ne dovoljuje izterjave kakršne koli pomoči, dodeljene pred datumom te odločbe.
The Commission takes note of the fact that interested third parties did not submit any comments or other information relevant to determining whether there is, on the part of beneficiaries of the scheme in question, a legitimate expectation such as might justify the adoption of individual transitional measures before the aid scheme is abolished.
Komisija se je seznanila z dejstvom, da zainteresirane stranke niso predložile pripomb ali drugih koristnih informacij, da se ugotovi, ali imajo upravičenci do zadevne ureditve upravičena pričakovanja, ki bi lahko utemeljila posebne prehodne ukrepe pred odpravo te sheme pomoči.
It has examined the information submitted by the Luxembourg authorities on 1929 holding companies' financing activities and the other arguments presented by those authorities concerning the legitimate expectations of current beneficiaries.
Komisija je poleg tega preučila informacije, ki so jih posredovali luksemburški organi in se nanašajo na dejavnosti financiranja holdinških družb 1929, in druge trditve teh organov o upravičenih pričakovanjih sedanjih upravičencev.
The thrust of these is that the said beneficiaries should be allowed to continue enjoying the scheme's effects during a transitional period before it is abolished altogether.
Njihov namen je navedenim upravičencem omogočiti, da ohranijo učinke ureditve v prehodnem obdobju pred njeno popolno odpravo.
In this respect the Commission would point out firstly that, in the light of the judgment of the Court of Justice of 22 June 2006, neither Luxembourg nor the beneficiaries under the scheme can claim a legitimate expectation in the maintenance of the exempt 1929 holding companies scheme during the transitional period laid down by the Council (in the context of the work of the Code of Conduct Group) for dismantling those parts of the scheme that are deemed to be harmful.
Komisija v zvezi s tem meni, da se, prvič, ob upoštevanju sodbe Sodišča z dne 22. junija 2006 niti Luksemburg niti upravičenci do ureditve ne morejo sklicevati na upravičena pričakovanja glede ohranitve ureditve davkov oproščenih holdinških družb 1929 v prehodnem obdobju, ki ga je Svet (v okviru dela Skupine „Kodeks ravnanja“) določil za odpravo elementov ureditve, ki naj bi bili škodljivi.
The state aid regime based on Articles 87-89 of the Treaty which is the subject matter of this proceeding is distinct from the Council's activities as part of the above-mentioned work.
Shema državnih pomoči, ki temelji na členih 87 do 89 Pogodbe in je predmet tega postopka, se namreč razlikuje od dejavnosti Sveta v okviru zgoraj navedenega dela.
The Commission would point out secondly that, although the exempt 1929 holding companies scheme is a permanent scheme, beneficiaries cannot in principle claim a legitimate expectation in its continued existence beyond the tax year to which the exemption applies.
Komisija meni, da je, drugič, davčna ureditev davkov oproščenih holdinških družb 1929 stalna ureditev. Vendar se upravičenci načeloma ne morejo sklicevati na upravičena pričakovanja o nadaljevanju obstoja zadevne ureditve po davčnem letu, v katerem se oprostitev uporablja.
In particular, the scheme is not conditional on the carrying out of specific investments by beneficiaries, but is instead limited to exempting the income received by exempt 1929 holding companies during the tax period concerned.
Komisija zlasti ugotavlja, da ureditev davkov oproščenih holdinških družb 1929 ni odvisna od izvajanja posebnih naložb s strani upravičencev, temveč je omejena zgolj na dohodke, ki so jih navedene holdinške družbe prejele v zadevnem davčnem letu.
Admittedly, however, the exempt 1929 holding companies scheme is still governed by the Law of 31 July 1929, which has not been significantly modified since it was promulgated.
Vendar je treba priznati, da ureditev davkov oproščenih holdinških družb 1929 še vedno spada v okvir zakona z dne 31. julija 1929, ki od razglasitve ni bil znatno spremenjen.
Although such longevity (76 years) is no guarantee of the scheme's permanence or of its compliance with the state aid rules, it may have given beneficiaries the impression that a tax scheme closely bound up with their activities would not be terminated all of a sudden and that they could reasonably expect those activities to continue.
Čeprav takšno dolgo trajanje (76 let) ni zagotovilo za trajnost ureditve ali njeno skladnost s pravili o državni pomoči, je upravičencem lahko dalo občutek, da davčni sistem, povezan z njihovimi dejavnostmi, ne bo nenadoma odpravljen in da lahko pričakujejo, da se bo še razumen čas nadaljeval.
The business of 1929 holding companies consists, moreover, in the provision of medium- and long-term financing.
Dejavnost holdinških družb 1929 poleg tega obsega odobritev srednje- in dolgoročnih financiranj.
This business is distinct from that of short-term financial trading and cannot be carried on outside of a lasting stable environment.
Ta dejavnost se razlikuje od kratkoročnega finančnega trgovanja in je ni mogoče opravljati brez časovne stabilnosti.
It is true that existing 1929 financial holding companies have invested heavily in the multinational groups to which they belong.
Poleg tega drži, da so davkov oproščene holdinške družbe 1929 dejansko veliko vlagale v okviru multinacionalnih skupin, katerim pripadajo.
This investment is aimed among other things at setting up and developing those multinational groups' infrastructure so as to coordinate and promote the growth of their business activities.
Namen teh naložb je predvsem vzpostavitev in razvoj infrastruktur multinacionalnih skupin za usklajevanje in pospeševanje razvoja njihovih poslovnih dejavnosti.
Any questioning of their status would therefore lead to difficult and complex reorganisation operations which would take some time to complete.
Postavljanje njihovega statusa pod vprašaj bo torej povzročilo občutljivo in zapleteno preoblikovanje, ki bo zahtevalo razmeroma veliko časa.
Similarly, medium- and long-term commitments have been entered into towards staff and outside service providers so as to enable holding companies to perform the activities related to the international groups to which they belong.
Prav tako so bile sprejete srednje- in dolgoročne obveznosti do zaposlenih in zunanjih izvajalcev storitev, da bodo holdinške družbe lahko opravljale dejavnosti, povezane z multinacionalnimi skupinami, katerim pripadajo.
According to the Luxembourg authorities, there are almost 13000 exempt 1929 holding companies currently active in Luxembourg; these contribute to the country's attractiveness as an international financial centre, the active population of which consists in any case of no more than 110000 workers.
V zvezi s tem je treba opozoriti, da po mnenju luksemburških organov v Luksemburgu sedaj deluje skoraj 13000 davkov oproščenih holdinških družb 1929 in da prispevajo k privlačnosti države kot mednarodnega finančnega centra, katerega število aktivnega prebivalstva je vseeno omejeno na 110000 delavcev.
The Commission must therefore be mindful of the relatively serious consequences that a decision to immediately abolish the exempt 1929 holding companies scheme might have for employment and economic growth in Luxembourg.
Komisija mora biti torej pozorna na razmeroma resne posledice, ki bi jih lahko imela odločitev o takojšnji odpravi ureditve davkov oproščenih holdinških družb 1929 na zaposlovanje in gospodarski razvoj v Luksemburgu.
In view of the above, the Commission considers it reasonable to grant a transitional period to exempt holding companies existing on the date of this Decision.
Ob upoštevanju zgornjega se Komisiji zdi razumno odobriti prehodno obdobje za davkov oproščene holdinške družbe, ki obstajajo na datum te odločbe.
This transitional period will end on 31 December 2010.
To prehodno obdobje se bo izteklo 31. decembra 2010.
However, those companies which continue to benefit from the exemption scheme until 31 December 2010 will not be able to form the subject matter of any total or partial transfer for consideration of their capital throughout the duration of this transitional arrangement, the reason being that, in view of their nature as holding companies, when their parts are disposed of they can no longer have any legitimate expectation of continuation of the tax exemption scheme.
Vendar družbe, ki bodo še naprej uživale ugodnost sistema oprostitve do 31. decembra 2010, ne bodo mogle biti predmet nobenega popolnega ali delnega prenosa svojega kapitala za plačilo med celotnim trajanjem te prehodne ureditve, ker se zato, ker so holdinške družbe, v primeru prenosa svojih deležev ne bodo mogle sklicevati na upravičena pričakovanja glede nadaljevanja sistema davčne oprostitve.
In the case of income exemption on and after 1 January 2011, application of the exempt 1929 holding companies scheme will therefore be unlawful and may give rise to recovery of any advantage granted.
Tako bo za oprostitve davkov od dohodkov od 1. januarja 2011 uporaba sistema oprostitve za davkov oproščene holdinške družbe 1929 nezakonita in bo lahko povzročila izterjavo vseh danih ugodnosti –
The tax scheme currently in force in Luxembourg in favour of holding companies exempted on the basis of the Law of 31 July 1929 (hereinafter called ‘exempt 1929 holding companies’) is a state aid scheme incompatible with the common market.
Davčna ureditev, ki v Luksemburgu sedaj velja za holdinške družbe, oproščene davkov na podlagi zakona z dne 31. julija 1929 (v nadaljnjem besedilu „davkov oproščene holdinške družbe 1929“), je shema državne pomoči, ki je nezdružljiva s skupnim trgom.