natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Set out in tabular form, the absolute and relative changes in Helaba's core capital since 1997, including the silent partnership contribution of the Land of Hessen and other silent partnership contributions, are as shown in the chart, with a distinction being made between the situation in accordance with recognition for banking supervisory purposes and the situation in accordance with the contractually agreed phase arrangements.
Absolutni in relativni razvoj temeljnega kapitala Helabe ter vložek tihe družbe dežele Hessen in drugi vložki tihe družbe po letu 1997 so prikazani v obliki preglednice spodaj, pri čemer se razlikuje med položajem v skladu s priznanjem s strani nadzorstva in položajem v skladu s pogodbeno dogovorjenim stopenjskim modelom.
Chart:
Preglednica:
End-of-year figures
Vrednosti ob koncu leta
EUR millions
mio. €
Under supervisory rules
V skladu s priznanjem s strani nadzorstva
Silent partnership contribution Land Hessen
Vložek tihe družbe dežela Hessen
Other silent partnership contributions
Drugi vložki tihe družbe
Core capital
Temeljni kapital
Share silent partnership contribution Land Hessen in %
Delež vložka tihe družbe dežela Hessen v %
Share other silent partnership contributions in %
Delež drugih vložkov tihe družbe v %
Under agreed phased arrangements
V skladu s pogodbeno dogovorjenim stopenjskim modelom
REMUNERATION OF THE OWN FUNDS TRANSFERRED
NADOMESTILO ZA PRENESENA LASTNA SREDSTVA
According to the information provided by Germany, for the silent partnership contribution Helaba paid the Land a remuneration (the so-called liability commission) of 1,4 % a year, consisting of a remuneration for the liability function of 1,2 % a year and a premium of 0,2 % a year for the perpetuity of the contribution and the bank's unilateral right of notice, plus trade tax on the part of the special fund usable by the bank, i.e. a total of 1,66 %.
Helaba za vložek tihe družbe po navedbah Nemčije deželi Hessen izplačuje nadomestilo (t.i. provizijo za jamstvo) v višini 1,4 % letno, ki vključuje nadomestilo za funkcijo jamstva v višini 1,2 % letno in pribitek v višini 0,2 % za trajnost vložka in enostransko pravico odpovedi banke ter s tem povezan obratovalni davek od dela posebnega sklada, ki ga lahko uporablja banka, torej skupaj 1,66 %.
It was agreed under the phased arrangement that this remuneration should not be payable in the first four years (1998 to 2002) on the full value of the fund, but on the agreed fixed tranches (reference amounts) rising in annual increments, which under the agreements reached in the transfer contract were to be used as cover for competitive business.
Pri tem je s tako imenovanim stopenjskim modelom dogovorjeno, da se to nadomestilo v prvih štirih letih (1998 do 2002) ne izplačuje za celotno vrednost sklada, temveč za dogovorjene, letno naraščajoče tranše (referenčne zneske), ki naj bi se v skladu z dogovori iz dogovora o prenosu uporabljali za kritje konkurenčnih dejavnosti.
According to the information provided by Germany, Helaba is liable to pay this remuneration on the basis of the phased arrangements irrespective of whether the silent partnership contribution is used to underpin competitive business or the business it pursues as part of its public task or whether the transferred capital is indeed used for solvency purposes at all.
Po navedbah Nemčije je Helaba zavezana k izplačevanju nadomestila na podlagi stopenjskega modela ne glede na to, ali se vložek tihe družbe uporablja za kritje konkurenčnih dejavnosti ali dejavnosti v okviru njenih javnih nalog, ter ali se prenesen kapital dejansko uporablja za namene solventnosti.
GROUNDS FOR INITIATING THE PROCEEDINGS
RAZLOGI ZA ZAČETEK POSTOPKA
In its decision of 13 November 2002 to initiate proceedings, the Commission took the preliminary view that the transfer of the housing-promotion loans by the Land of Hessen to Helaba probably constituted new state aid within the meaning of Article 87(1) of the EC Treaty, which, since the derogations provided for in Article 87(2) and (3) and in Article 86(2) of the EC Treaty were not met, appeared to be incompatible with the common market.
Komisija je v odločitvi o začetku postopka z dne 13. novembra 2002 predhodno ocenila, da gre pri prenosu posojil za pospeševanje gradnje stanovanj s strani dežele Hessen na Helabo verjetno za novo državno pomoč v smislu člena 87(1) Pogodbe ES, ki se je zaradi neupoštevanja posebnih določb, navedenih v členu 87 (2) in (3) ter členu 86(2) Pogodbe ES, izkazala kot nezdružljiva s skupnim trgom.
According to that principle, favourable treatment exists through the provision of public money if state funds are made available to an undertaking on terms which it would not have obtained under normal market conditions.
Po tem načelu gre pri vlogi državnih sredstev za pomoč, če dobi podjetje na razpolago državna sredstva, ki jih pod običajnimi tržnimi pogoji ne bi prejelo.
In view of the long-term risk-free rate (ten-year federal bonds) of around 4 % at the end of 1998, it appeared doubtful to the Commission whether the agreed remuneration could be regarded as appropriate, in particular allowing for a proper risk premium.
Komisija je z ozirom na dolgoročno netvegano obrestno mero (10-letne nemške obveznice) v višini približno 4 % ob koncu leta 1998 podvomila, ali se dogovorjeno nadomestilo lahko šteje za primerno, zlasti ob upoštevanju primerne rizične premije.
On the other hand, the Commission conceded that, in determining the normal market remuneration, the lack of liquidity of the capital provided in this instance should not be ignored.
Po drugi strani pa je priznala, da se pri določanju običajnega tržnega nadomestila ne sme prezreti manjkajoča likvidnost zadevnega prenesenega kapitala.
The promotion-related loans transferred as a silent partnership contribution would have to be used for public promotion purposes in the same way as before the transfer.
Posojila za pospeševanje, prenesena v obliki vložka tihe družbe, se morajo uporabljati za javne namene pospeševanja na enak način kot pred prenosom.
Consequently, Helaba could not use the transferred resources directly for its business.
Helaba torej prenesena sredstva ne more uporabljati neposredno za svoje poslovanje.
The broadening of the bank's equity capital base would, it is true, broaden Helaba's lending capacity (business-expansion function of equity capital).
Z razširitvijo obsega lastnega kapitala Helabe se je sicer povečala njena kreditna sposobnost (širjenje dejavnosti kot funkcija lastnega kapitala).
However, the bank could achieve the full potential scope of the increase in business volume only if it refinanced the additional credit volume to the full extent on the capital market.
Vendar lahko banka doseže celoten možen obseg razširitve dejavnosti le pod pogojem, da dodatni obseg kreditov v celoti refinancira na trgu kapitala.
In the Commission's view, therefore, the Land could not expect exactly the same yield as a provider of liquid capital, and a corresponding reduction was therefore proper.
Komisija je mnenja, da dežela Hessen zato ne more pričakovati natanko enakega donosa kot vlagatelj likvidnih sredstev in je torej primeren odbitek upravičen.
However, whether this could justify the deduction of the entire gross refinancing costs from the usual market remuneration for a liquid silent partnership contribution was doubtful in view of the tax deductibility of the refinancing costs.
Vendar pa z ozirom na obseg davčne olajšave za stroške refinanciranja obstaja dvom, ali to lahko upraviči odbitek celotnih bruto stroškov refinanciranja od običajnega tržnega nadomestila za likviden vložek tihe družbe.
The Commission doubted that the basic remuneration of 1,2 % a year agreed for the silent partnership contribution lay within the market corridor for comparable transactions, particularly as the absolute volume seemed to be above what was otherwise usual on the market.
Komisija je podvomila, ali je osnovno nadomestilo v višini 1,2 % letno, dogovorjeno za vložek tihe družbe, v okviru tržnega razpona za primerljive transakcije, zlasti zaradi dejstva, da se zdi absolutni obseg večji od običajnega na trgu.
It also doubted whether the addition of 0,2 % a year for the long-term nature of the contribution was usual on the market and whether the trade tax of 0,26 % a year payable by Helaba here, but not payable by it if it took on a silent partnership contribution from commercial investors, could be regarded as a further constituent part of the remuneration and as relevant for the market comparison.
Podvomila je tudi, ali je pribitek 0,2 % letno za dolgoročnost vloge na trgu običajen in ali se obratovalni davek v višini 0,26 % letno, ki ga mora Helaba plačevati v tem primeru, ne bi ga pa plačevala za vložek tihe družbe s strani poslovnih vlagateljev, lahko obravnava kot dodatni del nadomestila in kot pomemben za tržno primerjavo.
The Commission further doubted whether a market-economy investor in a comparable situation would have agreed to limit the remuneration in the first few years to partial amounts.
Poleg tega je izrazila tudi dvom, ali bi se vlagatelj v tržnem gospodarstvu v podobnih okoliščinah strinjal z omejitvijo nadomestila na delne zneske v prvih nekaj letih.
It had moreover to be examined in this context whether Helaba derived from the non-remunerated part of the silent partnership contribution further advantages that had to be remunerated, in particular an improvement in credit standing, since the silent partnership contribution was from the outset entered in full in the balance sheet and hence was available for liability purposes.
V tej zvezi je treba tudi preveriti, ali ima Helaba od dela vložka tihe družbe, ki se ne nadomešča, dodatne koristi, ki se morajo nadomestiti, zlasti v obliki izboljšave kreditne sposobnosti, saj se vložek tihe družbe že od vsega začetka v celoti knjiži v bilanci stanja in je zato na razpolago za namene jamstva.
Germany stated that the Land of Hessen had in 1997/1998 sought ways of achieving additional income from its housing-promotion assets, while maintaining the specific earmarking of their use, by transferring them to a credit institution.
Nemčija je navedla, da je dežela Hessen v letih 1997/98 iskala načine za dosego dodatnega dohodka s sredstvi za gradnjo stanovanj ob ohranitvi njihove namenskosti, tako da jih prenese na kreditno institucijo.
It was intended that the assets should remain undivided.
Sredstva naj se pri tem ne bi delila.
Only Helaba was prepared to accept this arrangement.
To je bila pripravljena sprejeti le Helaba.
The shareholders of Helaba would not have agreed to a share capital investment by the Land.
Delničarji Helabe se niso strinjali z naložbo dežele Hessen v osnovni kapital.
Consequently, the only core capital instrument considered was a silent partnership contribution.
Tako je torej med instrumenti temeljnega kapitala v poštev prišel le vložek tihe družbe.
According to Germany, none of the comments made by the Commission regarding the other Landesbanks applied to Helaba, particularly since it was profitable and not relatively under-endowed with liable capital and was not dependent on a transfer of promotion-related assets in order to maintain its existing business volume or to underpin its growth.
Po navedbah Nemčije trditve Komisije glede drugih deželnih bank za Helabo ne veljajo, predvsem zaradi dejstva, da je slednja donosna in ne razpolaga z razmeroma majhnim rizičnim kapitalom ter ni odvisna od prenosa sredstev za pospeševanje pri ohranjanju obstoječih dejavnosti ali kritju svojega širjenja.
Helaba was able to cover its capital requirements through its shareholder, the Sparkassen- und Giroverband Hessen-Thüringen, and on the capital market.
Helaba lahko svoje potrebe po kapitalu krije pri svojem delničarju Sparkassen- und Giroverband Hessen-Thüringen ter na trgu kapitala.
After the Basle Committee on Banking Supervision had, on 21 October 1998, in the ‘Sydney Declaration’, formulated new guidelines on the supervisory recognition of core capital instruments for credit institutions that operated internationally, the Land and the bank decided that the funds raised would be of unlimited rather than limited duration, so as to comply with the new provisions regarding recognition as core capital above the 15 % limit.
Potem ko je Baselski odbor za bančni nadzor dne 21. oktobra 1998 v tako imenovani „Sydneyjski izjavi“ za mednarodno dejavne kreditne institucije oblikoval nove smernice glede priznavanja instrumentov temeljnega kapitala s strani nadzorstva, sta se dežela Hessen in banka odločila za časovno neomejena sredstva v nasprotju z omejenimi z namenom upoštevanja novih določb glede priznavanja kot temeljni kapital nad mejo 15 %.
However, the Land had required a remuneration premium of 0,20 % a year in return for the perpetuity of the contribution and the bank's unilateral right of notice.
Vendar je dežela Hessen zahtevala pribitek na nadomestilo v višini 0,20 % letno za trajnost vloge in enostransko pravico odpovedi banke.
According to Germany, in the wake of the Sydney Declaration by the Basle Committee on Banking Supervision, a fungible market for silent partnership contributions had developed which was characterised by broad diversification on the investor side, with investors ranging from private investors to large institutional investors.
Po navedbah Nemčije se je po navedeni Sydneyjski izjavi Baselskega odbora za bančni nadzor razvil trg zamenjav za vložke tihih družb, za katerega je značilna velika raznovrstnost na vlagateljevi strani, pri čemer krog vlagateljev vključuje tako zasebne vlagatelje kot večje institucionalne vlagatelje.
A silent partnership differed here fundamentally from a holding in the share capital.
Tiha udeležba se pri tem bistveno razlikuje od udeležbe pri osnovnem kapitalu.
The silent partner did not have a holding in the undertaking and had only rudimentary rights of control.
Tihi družbenik nima deleža v podjetju in ima le osnovne pravice nadzora.
Whereas subscribed capital had to be remunerated through dividends after tax, the remuneration for a silent partnership contribution was a tax deductible operating expense.
Medtem ko se mora vpisani kapital nadomeščati z dividendami po obdavčitvi, je nadomestilo za vložek tihe družbe strošek poslovanja, ki se odšteje pred plačilom davka.
Under German banking supervision law, silent partnership contributions had been recognised even before 1998 as core capital without any limitation as to amount, and under international banking supervision law too, perpetual silent partnership contributions had been recognised as core capital since the ‘Sydney Declaration’ in October 1998.
Po nemškem pravu bančnega nadzorstva so se vložki tihe družbe priznavali kot temeljni kapital brez količinske omejitve že pred letom 1998 in tudi po mednarodnem zakonu o bančnem nadzoru se trajni vložki tihe družbe priznavajo kot temeljni kapital po Sydneyjski izjavi iz oktobra 1998.
In 1998/99, credit institutions had made increasing use of silent partnership contributions.
V letih 1998/99 so kreditne institucije v vse večjem obsegu uporabljale vložke tihe družbe.
The amounts involved had ranged up to USD 1 billion or DEM 1,2 billion (around EUR 0,6 billion).
Ti redi velikosti so znašali do 1 milijarde USD ali 1,2 milijarde DEM (približno 0,6 milijarde EUR).
Whereas they had not been very widespread at the beginning of the 1990s, silent partnership contributions were certainly no longer a marginal financing instrument in 1998/99.
Vložki tihe družbe na začetku 90-ih let prejšnjega stoletja niso bile zelo razširjene, v letih 1998/99 pa nikakor niso bile več postranski finančni instrument.
In working out the legal arrangements and in agreeing on the remuneration, the Land based itself on comparable transactions involving private credit institutions.
Dežela Hessen se je pri pripravi pravne oblike in dogovarjanju za nadomestilo opirala na primerljive transakcije, ki vključujejo zasebne kreditne institucije.
According to Germany, in 1998 SGZ Bank, for example, had agreed a liability remuneration of 1,2 % a year above the reference rate and HypoVereinsbank Luxemburg one of 1,6% a year, while in 1999 Dresdner Capital LLC had agreed a liability remuneration of 1,65 % above the relevant reference rate, HypoVereinsbank Luxemburg one of 1,25 % a year and Deutsche Bank one of 1,15 % a year for a so-called ‘perpetual’.
Po navedbah Nemčije se je leta 1998 banka SGZ, na primer, dogovorila za povračilo za jamstvo v višini 1,2 % letno nad referenčno obrestno mero, HypoVereinsbank Luxemburg pa za 1,6 %, medtem ko se je leta 1999 Dresdner Capital LLC dogovorila za povračilo za jamstvo v višini 1,65 % letno nad ustrezno referenčno obrestno mero, HypoVereinsbank Luxemburg za 1,25 %, Deutsche Bank pa za tako imenovani perpetual za 1,15 %.
The remuneration premiums for the funds taken up by private institutions were basically in a corridor between 0,80 % above twelve-month Libor and 2,15 % above US federal bonds .
Pribitki na nadomestilo za sredstva za zasebne institucije so načeloma v razponu med 0,80 % nad letno referenčno obrestno mero LIBOR in 2,15 % nad ameriškimi državnimi obveznicami.
Furthermore, the savings banks in Hessen and Thuringia had granted Helaba a silent partnership contribution with effect from 5 December 1997, for which the remuneration was 1,2 % a year above the reference interest rate.
Poleg tega sta hranilnici v Hessnu in Turingiji začeli dodeljevati vložek tihe družbe z dnem 5. decembra 1997, katere letno nadomestilo znaša 1,2 % nad referenčno obrestno mero.
Germany further stated that, in the case of variable interest rates, the reference interest rates related to money market instruments (Libor and Euribor), while in the case of fixed interest rates they related to bond market instruments (fixed-interest government bonds such as US treasuries and German federal bonds) or the interest rates on the swap market.
Nemčija je tudi navedla, da se v primeru spremenljivih obrestnih mer referenčne obrestne mere nanašajo na instrumente na denarnem trgu (LIBOR in EURIBOR), v primeru fiksnih obrestnih mer pa na instrumente na trgu obveznic (fiksno obrestovane državne obveznice, kot so ameriške obveznice in nemške obveznice) ali na obrestne mere na trgu zamenjav.
On the euro money market, lendings were usually carried out on the inter-bank market without any further premiums on the basis of Libor or Euribor.
Na evropskem denarnem trgu se izposoje ponavadi vršijo na medbančnem trgu brez dodatnih pribitkov na podlagi LIBOR ali EURIBOR.
In so far as these reference interest rates were chosen for silent partnership contributions, the premiums were identical to the liability remuneration for silent partnership contributions.
Če so te referenčne obrestne mere izbrane za vložke tihe družbe, so pribitki enaki nadomestilu za jamstvo za vložke tihe družbe.
On the bond market, the yields on government bonds were usually used as reference interest rates and, since the end of the 1990s, mid-swaps were increasingly used as the reference rate.
Na trgu obveznic se ponavadi za referenčne obrestne mere uporabljajo donosi na državne obveznice in od konca 90-ih let prejšnjega stoletja vse bolj referenčna obrestna mera „Mid-Swaps“ (povprečna obrestna mera razpona med ponudbeno in prodajno ceno na trgu zamenjav).
Even for first-rank bank bonds, banks had, on credit standing and/or liquidity grounds, to pay a different premium, varying with the state of the market, compared with government bonds having the same term.
Banke morajo celo na prvorazredne bančne obveznice za državne obveznice za enako obdobje zaradi bonitetnih in/ali likvidnostnih razlogov izplačevati različen pribitek, nihajoč glede na obstoječe stanje na trgu.
This premium was described as the refinancing premium.
Ta pribitek se imenuje pribitek za refinanciranje.
In assessing the fixed-interest silent partnership contributions of credit institutions, therefore, these refinancing premiums had to be deducted from the remuneration premiums.
Pri ocenjevanju fiksno obrestovanih vložkov tihe družbe v kreditne institucije se morajo torej ti pribitki za refinanciranje odbiti od pribitkov na nadomestilo.
These refinancing premiums for euro banks (senior bonds, JP Morgan-Index) compared with federal bonds had, according to Germany, ranged from just under 20 to over 40 basis points in the two-year period 1998-99.
Ti pribitki za refinanciranje za evropske banke (prednostne obveznice, indeks JP Morgan) v primerjavi z nemškimi obveznicami so se po navedbah Nemčije v dveletnem obdobju 1998-1999 gibali med slabimi 20 in dobrimi 40 odstotnimi točkami.
At the end of 1998, they amounted to just under 40 basis points.
Ob koncu leta 1998 so znašali skoraj 40 odstotnih točk.
In so far as the swap rate (mid-swaps) was chosen as the reference figure, however, the interest rate premium of a silent partnership contribution corresponded largely to the specific liability remuneration of the silent partnership contribution, since the swap rate interest premium relative to federal bonds corresponded roughly in market terms to the interest premium of ‘covered’ bank bonds relative to federal bonds and could therefore also be converted into interest premiums compared with Euribor.
Če pa se za referenčno vrednost izbere menjalna obrestna mera („Mid-Swaps“), je obrestni pribitek za vložek tihe družbe v veliki meri skladen s konkretnim nadomestilom za jamstvo za vložek tihe družbe, saj je obrestni pribitek z menjalno obrestno mero za nemške obveznice v tržnem smislu skoraj skladen z obrestnim pribitkom na „pokrite“ bančne obveznice za nemške obveznice in se zato lahko pretvori tudi v obrestne pribitke za EURIBOR.
The negotiations on the contribution and remuneration were carried out between the Land and the bank as between two independent parties.
Pogajanja o vložku in nadomestilu so potekala med deželo Hessen in banko kot med dvema med seboj neodvisnima strankama.
They had based themselves, in determining the finally agreed remuneration of 1,4 % a year (1,2 % plus a 0,2 % premium for the perpetuity of the contribution and the unilateral right of notice of the bank), on the above-mentioned corridor, with a whole series of data from the market as it then stood.
Končno dogovorjeno nadomestilo v višini 1,4 % letno (1,2 % plus pribitek 0,2 % za trajnost vložka in enostransko pravico odpovedi banke) temelji na navedenem razponu in celi vrsti podatkov s takrat obstoječega trga.
With regard to the premium for the perpetuity of the contribution, Germany stated that the comparable transactions referred to had terms of ten or twelve years and also 32 years or were of unlimited duration.
Nemčija je v zvezi s pribitkom za trajnost vložka podrobno navedla, da gre pri primerljivih transakcijah za obdobje 10 ali 12 in tudi 32 let ali za neomejeno obdobje.
The premium of 0,2 % a year for the perpetuity of the contribution was in conformity with the market in view of Helaba's AAA/Aaa rating at the relevant time, a rating which none of the comparable institutions achieved.
Pribitek 0,2 % letno za trajnost vloge je v skladu s trgom glede na boniteto Helabe AAA/Aaa v zadevnem obdobju, kakršne ne dosega nobena od primerljivih institucij.
The transactions on the capital market referred to for comparison purposes did not moreover reveal any dependence of the level of the remuneration on the amount of the funds taken up, either from the point of view of the institutions (total amount of the issue) or from the point of view of the investors (amount of the subscribed tranche).
Poleg tega transakcije na trgu kapitala, ki služijo za primerjavo, ne odražajo kakršne koli odvisnosti obsega nadomestila od zneska prejetih sredstev, niti z vidika institucij (celotni znesek izdaje) niti z vidika vlagateljev (znesek vpisane tranše).
In addition, Helaba had to pay trade tax, to which the Land of Hessen was not liable, on the remuneration of 1,4 %, so that the total charge was 1,66 % (before tax).
Helaba ob nadomestilu 1,4 % plačuje tudi obratovalni davek, h kateremu dežela Hessen ni zavezana, tako da je skupna obremenitev 1,66 % (pred obdavčitvijo).