natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
The Commission therefore feels that it cannot be proved with sufficient certainty that a market-economy investor would have required a particular premium for an injection of capital as large in relative and absolute terms as in this case.
Komisija zato meni, da ni mogoče z zadostno gotovostjo dokazati, da bi vlagatelj v tržnem gospodarstvu za dano absolutno in relativno velikost vloženega kapitala, kakor v tem primeru, zahteval poseben pribitek.
Accordingly, it is not imposing a premium linked to the volume of the asset transfer, something which works in LSH's favour.
Komisija se tako z vidika obsega prenosa sredstev v korist LSH vzdržuje zahteve po pribitku.
Similarly, the understanding between the parties assumes that no premium should be applied on account of the high volume of assets transferred.
Tudi dogovor izhaja iz dejstva, da zaradi velikega obsega prenesenih sredstev pribitek ni potreben.
Lastly, attention must be drawn to the non-marketability of the assets, i.e. the impossibility of withdrawing the invested capital at any time from the company.
Nazadnje je treba opozoriti tudi na nezadostno tržnost sredstev, t.j. nemožnost, da bi se vložen kapital kadar koli dvignil iz podjetja.
He cannot withdraw the assets he originally brought in since these now form part of the company's liable equity capital and are no longer at his disposal.
Pri tem sicer ne more dvigniti svojih prvotno vloženih sredstev. Ta so zdaj del rizičnega lastnega kapitala družbe in mu niso več na razpolago.
But by selling the shares — at the prevailing exchange price — he can realise their economic countervalue.
Lahko pa s prodajo delnice realizira njeno gospodarsko protivrednost.
His assets have thereby become fungible.
Njegov kapitalski vložek s tem postane tržen.
Because of the special circumstances surrounding the transfer of IB's assets, this option was not available to the Land.
Zaradi posebnih okoliščin prenosa kapitala IB dežela te možnosti ni imela.
However, the Commission does not see any reason for a further premium.
Vendar Komisija ne vidi razloga za dodaten pribitek.
Although the Land was unable to realise the economic countervalue by trading freely in the investment, it could at any time have withdrawn the special-purpose reserve from LSH by law and achieved possibly higher returns by reinvesting it in other institutions.
Sicer dežela ni imela možnosti realizirati gospodarske protivrednosti s prosto tržnostjo naložbe, vendar je obstajala načeloma možnost, da se posebna namenska sredstva z zakonom izvzamejo iz LSH in po potrebi z vnovičnim vnosom v druge institucije dosežejo večji donosi.
Here too the understanding between the BdB, the Land of Schleswig-Holstein and HSH Nordbank assumes that no premium should be applied on account of the lack of fungibility.
Tudi tukaj dogovor med BdB, deželo Schleswig-Holstein in HSH Nordbank izhaja iz dejstva, da zaradi nezadostne tržnosti sredstev pribitek ni potreben.
Overall, the Commission therefore considers a premium of 0,3 % per annum (after corporation tax and before investor tax) to be appropriate for forgoing additional voting rights.
Na splošno Komisija zato meni, da je pribitek na donos 0,3 % letno (po obdavčitvi dobička in pred obdavčitvijo naložbe) primeren za odpoved dodatnim glasovalnim pravicam primeren.
Overall remuneration
Celotno nadomestilo
In view of all of the above observations and in agreement with the complainant (BdB), the Land of Schleswig-Holstein and LSH, the Commission comes to the conclusion that an appropriate remuneration would be 6,28 % (after corporation taxes), i.e. a 9,29 % normal return on the investment in question, plus 0,3 % for the particularities of the transaction and minus 3,31 % for the financing costs which LSH incurred on account of the lack of liquidity of the assets transferred.
Na podlagi vseh teh preudarkov in soglasno s pritožnikom BdB, deželo Schleswig-Holstein in LSH Komisija prihaja do zaključka, da bi primerno nadomestilo znašalo 6,28 % letno (po obdavčitvi dobička), namreč običajni donos za zadevno naložbo 9,29 % plus 0,3 % zaradi posebnosti transakcije z odbitkom 3,31 % zaradi stroškov financiranja, ki jih ima LSH zaradi manjkajoče likvidnosti prenesenih sredstev.
Appropriate remuneration for IB's capital up to the time when it was recognised by BAKred, for the amount used by IB and for the special-purpose real-estate reserve
Primerno nadomestilo za kapital IB do njegovega priznanja s strani BAKred, za znesek, uporabljen s strani IB, in za nepremičnine kot rezervo za posebne namene
As stated above, IB's capital was already of material value to LSH before it was recognised by BAKred as core capital within the meaning of the Banking Act (KWG), as it appeared on the balance sheet as equity right from the time of the transfer.
Kot je že navedeno, je imel kapital IB za LSH materialno vrednost, še preden ga je BAKred priznal kot temeljni kapital v smislu KWG, saj je bil že za časa prenosa v bilanci stanja vknjižen kot lastni kapital.
The same applies to the amount used by IB and to the special-purpose real-estate reserve.
Enako velja za znesek, uporabljen s strani IB, in nepremičnine kot rezervo za posebne namene.
Its economic function can be compared to that of a guarantee or liability.
Njegovo gospodarsko funkcijo lahko v tem pogledu primerjamo s poroštvom ali jamstvom.
A market-economy investor would demand an appropriate remuneration in return for incurring a risk of this sort.
Vlagatelj v tržnem gospodarstvu bi za izpostavitev tovrstnemu tveganju zahteval primerno nadomestilo.
Germany initially regarded as inappropriate the basic rate of 0,3 % per annum recognised by the Commission in Decision 2000/392/EC for the guarantee function enjoyed by LSH.
Nemčija je sprva menila, da izhodiščna stopnja 0,3 % letno, ki jo je Komisija priznala v Odločbi 2000/392/ES, za funkcijo jamstva v korist LSH ni primerna.
In Decision 2000/392/EC, a premium of a further 0,3 % per annum was added on top of that rate because, firstly, guarantees are normally tied to certain transactions and limited in time (which was not the case in WestLB) and, secondly, the amount of over DEM 3400 million made available to WestLB was higher than that normally covered by such bank guarantees.
V Odločbi 2000/392/ES je bil na navedeno stopnjo 0,3 % letno opravljen pribitek dodatnih 0,3 % letno, saj so bančna jamstva običajno povezana z določenimi transakcijami in časovno omejena (v primeru WestLB ni bilo tako), poleg tega pa je bil znesek 3,4 milijarde DEM, ki je bil dan na razpolago WestLB, večji od tistega, ki ga taka bančna jamstva ponavadi krijejo.
Since WestLB and LSH are fundamentally comparable and for want of any other points of reference, the Commission assumes that this rate corresponds to the remuneration that LSH would also have to have paid on the market for a guarantee in its favour.
Zaradi splošne primerljivosti WestLB in LSH in odsotnosti drugih meril je Komisija mnenja, da ta stopnja ustreza nadomestilu, ki bi ga LSH tudi morala na trgu izplačati za prevzem bančnega jamstva v svojo korist.
Here too the understanding between the BdB, the Land of Schleswig-Holstein and LSH assumes that a premium of 0,3 % is justified.
Tudi tukaj dogovor med BdB, deželo Schleswig-Holstein in LSH izhaja iz dejstva, da se zdi pribitek 0,3 % letno upravičen.
The Commission therefore considers that a premium is justified in the case of LSH and lays down a rate of 0,3 % per annum as appropriate remuneration for the guarantee function of the capital from the time when the transferred amount appeared on the balance sheet (1 January 1991) up to its recognition by BAKred.
Komisija tako spoznava pribitek v primeru LSH za upravičenega in zato sprejema stopnjo 0,3 % letno kot primerno nadomestilo za funkcijo jamstva kapitala od trenutka vnosa v bilanco stanja dne 1. januarja 1991 do priznanja s strani BAKred.
The parties used a rate of 0,3 % per annum after tax as a basis in the table calculating the aid element annexed to the text of their understanding.
Stopnjo 0,3 % letno po obdavčitvi so stranke uporabile pri izračunu elementa pomoči v preglednici, priloženi dogovoru.
No account to be taken of IB dividend payments
Neupoštevanje izplačil dividend IB
Germany argued that the IB dividends paid to the Land from 1993 to 2002, amounting to DEM 99,9 million, should be deducted from the remuneration payable.
Nemčija je navedla, da je treba dividende IB v višini 99,9 milijona DEM, izplačane deželi Schleswig-Holstein v obdobju med 1993 in 2002, odbiti od nadomestila, ki ga je treba izplačati.
However, payments made or increases in value achieved after the investment cannot be taken into account when applying the principle of the market-economy investor, who, on the basis of the information available to him at the time of the investment, either expects an appropriate return or agrees a direct remuneration.
Po naložbi opravljena izplačila ali realizirana povečanja vrednosti pa se po načelu vlagatelja v tržnem gospodarstvu, ki na podlagi informacij, razpoložljivih v času naložbe, lahko pričakuje primeren donos ali se dogovori za neposredno nadomestilo, ne morejo upoštevati.
Dividends or increases in value which cannot be calculated in advance are not relevant.
Izplačila ali povečanja vrednosti, ki jih ni mogoče izračunati vnaprej, torej ne morejo biti odločilna.
The Commission therefore considers that the IB dividend payments should not be deducted from the remuneration to be paid in this case.
Komisija je tako mnenja, da se v zadevnem primeru izplačila dividend IB ne smejo odbiti od nadomestila, ki ga je treba izplačati.
SYNERGY EFFECTS
Sinergijski učinki
LSH considers that an assessment of the remuneration paid to the Land must take account of the synergy gains achieved through the transfer.
LSH je mnenja, da je treba pri oceni nadomestila, izplačanega deželi, upoštevati tudi sinergijske prednosti, dosežene z vlogo.
However, it is clear that the actual purpose of the transfer was to provide LSH with the equity base needed to comply with the new solvency rules.
Vendar je jasno razvidno, da je bil pravi namen prenosa zagotoviti LSH obseg lastnega kapitala, potreben za izpolnitev novih predpisov o solventnosti.
Synergy gains were seen as a positive side-effect but were certainly not the main driving force behind the transaction at the time.
Sinergije so veljale za pozitiven (stranski) učinek, vendar v tem času zagotovo niso bile glavni razlog za transakcijo.
Furthermore, if such synergies and cost savings accrue to IB, this will help the WKA and WAK (and hence the Land) by reducing costs, but cannot be regarded as consideration paid by LSH for the provision of the original own funds.
Nadalje, če za IB nastanejo takšne sinergije in prihranki stroškov, to koristi WKA in WAK z zmanjšanjem stroškov (in tako deželi), ampak se ne more šteti kot vračilo LSH za zagotovitev temeljnih lastnih sredstev.
Since these synergies neither reduce the usability of the transferred capital for LSH nor increase LSH's costs from the transfer, they should also not influence the level of remuneration for the equity provided which a market-economy investor can demand from the bank.
Ker se s temi sinergijami ne zmanjša niti uporabnost prenesenega kapitala za LSH niti povečajo stroški, ki so za LSH nastali s prenosom, sinergije tudi ne smejo vplivati na višino povračila, ki bi ga lahko vlagatelj v tržnem gospodarstvu od banke zahteval za zagotovljeni lastni kapital.
Even if there were an actual benefit accruing to the Land as a result of synergies, any competitor would have been forced by competition to ‘pay’ to the Land on top of the appropriate consideration for the equity provided, a ‘remuneration’ in the form of benefits for the financial instrument (IB's capital).
Tudi v primeru dejanske prednosti za deželo kot posledice sinergij, bi bil vsak tekmec zaradi konkurence prisiljen deželi za finančni instrument (kapital IB) poleg primernega povračila za zagotovljeni lastni kapital „izplačati“ še „nadomestilo“ v obliki takšnih prednosti.
Moreover, following a merger operation, synergy effects normally arise in both merged entities.
Poleg tega se sinergije po združitvi običajno oblikujejo v obeh podjetjih, udeleženih pri združitvi.
It is difficult to understand why LSH should not profit at all from such advantages.
Težko je razumeti, zakaj LSH sploh ni mogla pridobiti s temi prednostmi.
Legislative amendment on 1 June 2003
Zakonska sprememba z dne 1. junija 2003
Germany stated that IB was split off from the assets of LSH with legal effect as of 1 June 2003.
Nemčija je navedla, da je bila s pravnim učinkom dne 1. junija 2003 IB odcepljena od sredstev LSH.
The special-purpose real-estate reserve was split off from LSH with legal effect as of 1 June 2003.
Nepremičnine kot rezerva za posebne namene so bile od sredstev LSH odcepljene s pravnim učinkom dne 1. junija 2003.
After 1 June 2003 LSH was, therefore, no longer able to underpin risk assets resulting from its competitive business with special-purpose assets or to use the latter as a guarantee.
LSH zato po 1. juniju 2003 ne more več kriti tveganih sredstev iz konkurenčnih dejavnosti LSH s posebnimi namenskimi sredstvi ali slednja uporabljati za funkcijo jamstva.
The Commission therefore accepts that the favourable treatment was brought to an end with the hive-off of the special-purpose assets on 1 June 2003.
Za Komisijo torej šteje kot dokaz, da je bila z odsvojitvijo posebnih namenskih sredstev tukaj preiskovana pomoč končana 2. junija 2003.
As calculated above, the Commission comes to the conclusion that LSH should have paid a remuneration of 6,28 % per annum after tax for the special-purpose reserve that was recognised by BAKred as core capital, and 0,3 % after tax for the difference between this part and the amount shown as equity on LSH's balance sheet, as well as for the special-purpose real-estate reserve.
Po zgornjih izračunih Komisija prihaja do zaključka, da znaša nadomestilo, ki ga mora izplačati LSH, za posebna namenska sredstva, ki jih je BAKred priznal kot temeljni kapital, 6,28 % letno po obdavčitvi in 0,3 % po obdavčitvi za razliko med tem delom in zneskom, vknjiženem v bilanci stanja LSH kot lastni kapital, ter za nepremičnine kot rezervo za posebne namene.
This remuneration should have been paid from 1 January 1991 until the favourable treatment was brought to an end on 31 May 2003.
To povračilo bi se moralo izplačevati od 1. januarja 1991 do konca pomoči dne 31. maja.
LSH paid a remuneration only on the amount it could use to underpin its commercial business.
LSH je izplačevala povračilo samo za znesek, ki ga je lahko uporabljala za kritje svojih poslovnih dejavnosti.
The aid element can be calculated as the difference between the actual payments and the payments which would correspond to market conditions.
Element pomoči je mogoče izračunati kot razliko med dejanskimi izplačili in izplačili, ki bi ustrezali tržnim pogojem.
The following table shows the calculation of the aid element:
Spodnja preglednica prikazuje izračun elementa pomoči:
Figure 4:
Preglednica 4:
Amount used by IB
Znesek, uporabljen s strani IB
Amount between 1.1.1991 and 30.8.1991
Znesek med 1.1.1991 in 30.8.1991
Special-purpose real-estate reserve
Nepremičnine kot rezerva za posebne namene
Remuneration of 6,28 % (after tax) on point 1
Povračilo 6,28 % (po obdavčitvi) za 1.
Remuneration of 0,3 % (after tax) on point 3
Povračilo 0,3 % (po obdavčitvi) za 4.
Actual remuneration (after tax)
Dejansko povračilo (po obdavčitvi)
Accordingly, the aid element for the period from the granting of the aid up to and including 31 May 2003 comes to DEM 845,6 million, which must be converted to EUR 432,3 million.
Element pomoči za obdobje med dodelitvijo pomoči in vključno 31. majem 2003 torej znaša v nemških markah 845,6 milijona DEM. Ta znesek se preračuna v eure in znaša 432,3 milijona EUR.
This development is intensifying in the wake of economic and monetary union, which is dismantling the remaining obstacles to competition in the financial services markets.
Ta razvoj se trenutno še stopnjuje zaradi ekonomske in monetarne unije, ki odpravlja preostale ovire za konkurenčnost na trgih finančnih storitev.
LSH had a regional base and also carried on international banking business.
Upravičenka LSH je bila regionalno uveljavljena in v bančništvu dejavna tudi mednarodno.
It defined itself as an all-purpose commercial bank, central bank for the savings banks and the bank of the Land and its municipalities.
Šlo je za splošno poslovno banko, centralno hranilnico ter banko dežele Schleswig-Holstein in njenih občin.
Despite its name, tradition and legally stipulated tasks, LSH was much more than a mere local or regional bank.
Kljub svojemu imenu, tradiciji in zakonsko urejenim nalogam LSH nikakor ni bila zgolj lokalna ali regionalna banka.
These facts clearly show that LSH offered its banking services in competition with other European banks outside Germany and, since banks from other European countries are active in Germany, inside Germany.
Na podlagi tega je jasno, da je LSH nudila bančne storitve v konkurenci z drugimi evropskimi bankami izven Nemčije in, ker so banke iz drugih evropskih držav dejavne v Nemčiji, v Nemčiji.
It should also be pointed out that there is a very close relationship between a credit institution's equity capital and its banking activities.
Opozoriti je treba tudi, da je med lastnim kapitalom kreditne institucije in njenimi bančnimi dejavnostmi zelo tesna povezava.
It is only when it has sufficient recognised equity capital that a bank can do business and expand its commercial activities.
Banka lahko posluje in širi svoje trgovske dejavnosti le z zadostnim priznanim lastnim kapitalom.
As the state measure provided LSH with such equity capital for solvency purposes, it directly influenced the bank's business possibilities.
Ker je državni ukrep LSH zagotovil takšen lastni kapital za namene solventnosti, je to neposredno vplivalo na poslovne možnosti banke.
It is clear, therefore, that aid given to LSH distorts competition and affects trade between Member States.
Torej drži, da pomoči za LSH izkrivljajo konkurenco in ovirajo trgovino med državami članicami.
On the basis of all these considerations, it can be stated that all the criteria of Article 87(1) of the EC Treaty are met and hence that the transfer of the special-purpose reserve involves state aid within the meaning of that Article.
Na podlagi vseh teh preudarkov lahko ugotovimo, da so izpolnjena vsa merila iz člena 87(1) Pogodbe ES in zato prenos posebnih namenskih sredstev vključuje državne pomoči v smislu navedenega člena.
An assessment must also be made as to whether that aid can be considered compatible with the common market.
Nadalje je treba preveriti, ali se pomoč lahko spozna za združljivo s skupnim trgom.
It should be noted in this respect that LSH invoked only the exemption laid down in Article 86(2) of the EC Treaty in relation to any aid elements present in the transfer of IB's capital and of the real estate.
V tej zvezi je treba pripomniti, da je LSH v zvezi z morebitnimi elementi pomoči v okviru prenosa kapitala IB in nepremičnin uveljavljala le posebno določbo iz člena 86(2) Pogodbe ES.
None of the exemption clauses of Article 87(2) of the EC Treaty is applicable.
Posebne določbe iz člena 87(2) Pogodbe ES se ne uporabljajo.
Since the economic survival of LSH was not at stake when the measure was taken, there is no need to consider whether the collapse of a single large credit institution like LSH could lead to a general banking crisis in Germany, something which might possibly justify aid to remedy a serious disturbance in the German economy under Article 87(3)(b) of the EC Treaty.
Ker gospodarski obstoj LSH v času ukrepa ni bil ogrožen, ni potrebno preučiti, ali bi propad ene same velike kreditne institucije, kot je LSH, lahko v Nemčiji privedel do splošne krize v bančnem sektorju, kar bi morda v skladu s členom 87(3)(b) Pogodbe ES upravičilo pomoč za odpravljanje resne motnje v nemškem gospodarstvu.
Under Article 87(3)(c) of the EC Treaty, aid may be found compatible with the common market if it facilitates the development of certain economic activities.
V skladu s členom 87(3)(c) Pogodbe ES se lahko pomoči spoznajo za združljive s skupnim trgom, če pospešujejo razvoj določenih gospodarskih panog.
This might, in principle, also apply to restructuring aid in the banking sector.
To bi načeloma lahko veljalo tudi za pomoči za prestrukturiranje v bančnem sektorju.
However, in the case at hand the conditions for the application of this exemption clause are not met.
Vendar v zadevnem primeru pogoji za uporabo te posebne določbe niso izpolnjeni.
LSH is not described as an undertaking in difficulty whose viability must be restored with the support of state aid.
LSH ni predstavljena kot podjetje v težavah, čigar vitalnost bi se morala povrniti z državno pomočjo.
Article 86(2) of the EC Treaty, which allows exemptions from the Treaty's state aid provisions under certain conditions, is in principle also applicable to the financial services sector.
Člen 86(2) Pogodbe ES, ki pod določenimi pogoji dopušča odstopanja od določb o državni pomoči iz Pogodbe, se načeloma uporablja tudi za sektor finančnih storitev.
This was confirmed by the Commission in its report on services of general economic interest in the banking sector.
Komisija je to potrdila v svojem poročilu o „storitvah skupnega gospodarskega interesa v bančnem sektorju“.
LSH argued that it provided services of general economic interest and that to the extent that any sums contributed by the Land of Schleswig-Holstein were used for purposes of its public-service tasks or services of general interest, such sums did not constitute unlawful state aid.
LSH je trdila, da nudi storitve skupnega gospodarskega interesa in da glede na obseg, v katerem se morebitni vložki dežele Schleswig-Holstein uporabljajo za namene njenih javnih nalog ali storitev skupnega interesa, ne gre za nezakonite državne pomoči.
However, LSH does not meet the necessary formal conditions: no precise indication is given of the specific tasks which it carries out in providing services of general economic interest, and in particular of the specific costs generated by such tasks.
Vendar LSH v tem primeru ne izpolnjuje formalnih pogojev: konkretne naloge, ki jih LSH opravlja pri zagotavljanju storitev skupnega gospodarskega interesa, in zlasti s tem povezani konkretni stroški, ki nastajajo ob takih nalogah, niso podrobno opredeljeni.
It is therefore clear that the transfer was effected in order to enable LSH to comply with the new own funds requirements and with no regard to any services of general economic interest.
Tako je jasno, da je bil prenos opravljen z namenom izboljšanja položaja LSH, da bi slednja lahko izpolnila nove zahteve po lastnem kapitalu, in brez upoštevanja kakršnih koli storitev skupnega gospodarskega interesa.
Since no exemption from the principle of the ban on state aid pursuant to Article 87(1) of the EC Treaty applies, the aid in question cannot be found compatible with the Treaty.
Ker se odstopanja od načela prepovedi državnih pomoči v skladu s členom 87(1) Pogodbe ES ne uporabljajo, se zadevna pomoč ne more šteti za združljivo s Pogodbo.
Contrary to what was argued by Germany and LSH, the capital injection cannot be regarded as being covered by the existing state aid scheme for Anstaltslast and Gewährträgerhaftung.
V nasprotju s trditvami Nemčije in LSH vloge kapitala ni mogoče obravnavati niti kot del obstoječih programov pomoči Anstaltslast in Gewährträgerhaftung.
Anstaltslast requires the guarantor, the Land of Schleswig-Holstein, to provide LSH with the resources it needs to function properly for as long as the Land decides to maintain it in existence.
Anstaltslast zavezuje garanta (dežela Schleswig-Holstein), da LSH zagotavlja sredstva, potrebna za pravilno delovanje, dokler se ne odloči za prenehanje njenega obstoja.
However, at the time of the capital injection, LSH was far from being in a situation where it was no longer able to operate properly for lack of sufficient resources.
Toda LSH v času vloge kapitala še zdaleč ni bila v položaju, v katerem pravilno delovanje zaradi pomanjkanja lastnih sredstev ne bi bilo več mogoče.