natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Kingston was the only other telecommunications operator valued under the R&E method.
Kingston je bil edini drugi telekomunikacijski operater, ki je bil ovrednoten na podlagi metode prejemkov in izdatkov.
However, Kingston also owns a subsidiary, Torch Communications Ltd, which constructed a fibre backbone network outside Kingston's local access network area (i.e. Hull conurbation) and operates that backbone network as a separate subsidiary.
Vendar ima Kingston v lasti tudi odvisno družbo, Torch Communications Ltd, ki je zunaj območja Kingstonovega omrežja za lokalni dostop (tj. somestja Hull) zgradila hrbtenično omrežje iz optičnih vlaken, ki ga upravlja kot ločeno odvisno družbo.
As a result, the Torch backbone network can be separately valued on the basis of the rental method.
Zato se hrbtenično omrežje Torch lahko ločeno ovrednoti na podlagi metode najemnine.
Application of the property tax to Vtesse
Odmera davka od premoženja za Vtesse
Vtesse is the complainant.
Vtesse je pritožnik.
It is a ‘fibre to the business’ service provider offering high capacity retail leased lines, mainly supplied to large corporate users.
Gre za ponudnika storitve „optično vlakno do podjetja“, ki ponuja visoko zmogljive maloprodajne zakupljene vode, ki jih večinoma dobavlja velikim podjetjem.
It directly competes with BT's leased line offers.
Neposredno konkurira ponudbam zakupljenih vodov BT.
In order to connect its customers, Vtesse leases ‘dark’ fibre from other backbone operators and complements this with its own built infrastructure.
Za priključitev svojih uporabnikov Vtesse od drugih operaterjev hrbteničnih omrežij najame „temna“ optična vlakna in to dopolnjuje z lastno zgrajeno infrastrukturo.
The property rented from other parties is included in the rateable hereditament of Vtesse.
Lastnina, najeta od drugih strank, je vključena v obdavčljivo premoženje Vtesse.
The VOA has decided to rate Vtesse based on the ‘tone of the list’ method, which is then applied each time new fibre is rented and lit.
VOA se je odločila, da bo Vtesse obdavčila na podlagi metode „po seznamu“, ki se nato uporabi vsakič, ko se najame in priključi novo optično vlakno.
Based on benchmarks of actual rents paid, the VOA has set the annual rate under the rental method at GBP 1200 per km of pair of optic fibre in the London metropolitan area and GBP 1000 per km in the other parts of the United Kingdom for the 2000-2005 period.
Na podlagi meril uspešnosti dejansko plačanih najemnin je VOA po metodi najemnine letno stopnjo za obdobje 2000–2005 določila na 1200 GBP na km za par optičnih vlaken v metropolitanskem območju Londona in na 1000 GBP na km v drugih delih Združenega kraljestva.
In addition, in 2001, a so called ‘oversupply allowance’ was granted by the VOA to fibre providers assessed under the rental method, equalling a 15 % discount on the rateable value effective as of 1 April 2001 and 25 % as of 1 April 2002.
Poleg tega je VOA ponudnikom optičnih vlaken, ki so bili ocenjeni na podlagi metode najemnine, leta 2001 dodelila tako imenovano „olajšavo za preveliko ponudbo“, ki je ustrezala 15-odstotnemu znižanju obdavčljive vrednosti po 1. aprilu 2001 in 25-odstotnemu znižanju po 1. aprilu 2002.
This allowance was meant to reflect the overinvestment in fibres during the telecommunications boom of the late 1990s and the subsequent drastic reduction in value of these assets due to physical oversupply.
Ta olajšava naj bi odražala preveliko vlaganje v optična vlakna med telekomunikacijskim razcvetom v poznih 90. letih 20. stoletja in poznejše drastično zmanjšanje vrednosti tega premoženja zaradi fizično prevelike ponudbe.
There is a further discount of 10 % for networks over 3000 km.
Za omrežja prek 3000 km velja še dodatno 10-odstotno znižanje.
Following these discounts, the rental value of a fibre pair fell to GBP 900 per km in the London area and GBP 750 per km in the other parts of the country in the years 2002-2004.
Na podlagi teh znižanj je najemna vrednost para optičnih vlaken v letih 2002–2004 na območju Londona padla na 900 GBP na km in v drugih delih države na 750 GBP na km.
For the 2005-2010 period, the rental value of a fibre pair was set at GBP 600 per km in the London area and GBP 500 per km in the rest of the United Kingdom.
Za obdobje 2005–2010 je bila najemna vrednost para optičnih vlaken za območje Londona določena na 600 GBP na km in na 500 GBP na km drugje v Združenem kraljestvu.
According to Vtesse, its tax liability was around 7 % of its recurring revenues in 2003/04.
Po navedbah Vtesse je njena davčna obveznost v obdobju 2003/04 znašala približno 7 % njenih tekočih prihodkov.
As to revisions, the tone of the list rate is applied to each fibre which is rented and lit.
Kar zadeva popravke, se stopnja po seznamu uporabi za vsako najeto in priključeno optično vlakno.
Vtesse has the obligation to regularly inform the VOA of extensions to its network so that the valuation of its hereditament can be adjusted.
Vtesse mora agencijo VOA redno obveščati o razširitvah svojega omrežja, da se vrednotenje njene nepremičnine lahko prilagodi.
As a consequence, whenever it procures fibre to provide services to its customers, Vtesse claimed that it is liable for rates that may equal up to 20-30 % of the revenues of a new contract.
Vtesse je trdila, da je zato ob vsakem nakupu optičnih vlaken za zagotovitev storitev svojim uporabnikom dolžna plačati davek, ki lahko znese do 20-30 % prihodkov nove pogodbe.
As to the other telecommunications operators in the market, they are valued under the rental method, with the exception of cable TV operators, which are valued on the basis of a method derived from the contractor's basis method.
Drugi telekomunikacijski operaterji na trgu so ovrednoteni po metodi najemnine, z izjemo operaterjev kabelske televizije, ki so ovrednoteni na podlagi metode, izpeljane iz metode pogodbenikove osnove.
Reasons for initiating the formal investigation procedure
B Razlogi za sprožitev formalnega postopka preiskave
In its decision to initiate the procedure, the Commission considered that the application of the property tax to BT and Kingston could confer an advantage on these two firms.
V odločitvi o sprožitvi postopka je Komisija menila, da bi odmera davka na premoženje za BT in Kingston tema dvema podjetjema lahko prinesla ugodnost.
They seem to benefit from a reduction of their tax base as compared with the other competitors.
Zdi se, da sta v primerjavi z drugimi konkurenti deležni znižanja svojih davčnih osnov.
This was reflected by the fact that BT paid in the range of around 2 % of relevant revenues in tax, while Vtesse and other competitors might have to pay in the range of around 7 %, and up to 20-30 % on an incremental basis.
To se je odražalo z dejstvom, da je BT plačeval davek, ki je obsegal približno 2 % zadevnih prihodkov, medtem ko je mogoče, da ga bodo Vtesse in drugi konkurenti morali plačevati v obsegu okrog 7 % in postopoma do 20–30 %.
The decision to initiate the procedure expressed the view that this apparently discriminatory taxation could be the result of the application of a particular asset valuation method to BT and Kingston, while the other telecommunications operators are valued under the rental method, again with the exception of cable TV operators, which are valued on the basis of a method derived from the contractor's basis method.
V odločitvi o sprožitvi postopka je bili izraženo mnenje, da bi bila ta očitno diskriminatorna obdavčitev lahko posledica tega, da se pri vrednotenju premoženja BT in Kingstona uporablja posebna metoda, medtem ko so drugi telekomunikacijski operaterji ovrednoteni po metodi najemnine, spet z izjemo operaterjev kabelske televizije, ki so ovrednoteni na podlagi metode, izpeljane iz metode pogodbenikove osnove.
The non-uniformity of the system and the discretionary powers which are given to the VOA to apply the general provisions to specific operators and which were used in the context of the settlement negotiated with BT, may have resulted in a specific advantage to BT and Kingston.
Neenotnost sistema in diskrecijske pravice, na podlagi katerih lahko VOA splošne določbe uporabi za točno določene operaterje in ki jih je uporabila v okviru poravnave, s pogajanji dosežene z BT, so lahko pripeljale do posebne ugodnosti za BT in Kingston.
The decision to initiate the procedure questioned the view that the rental method could not be applied to BT's and Kingston's hereditaments.
V odločitvi o sprožitvi postopka je bil izražen dvom v zvezi s stališčem, da se metoda najemnine ne more uporabiti za nepremičnine BT in Kingstona.
It suggested that the rent received by BT when renting out its own infrastructure could serve as guidance for the value of the network.
Predlagano je bilo, da bi se najemnina, ki jo BT prejme ob oddaji svoje infrastrukture v najem, lahko uporabila kot opora za določitev vrednosti omrežja.
Moreover, BT's retail business units effectively rent infrastructure and buy network services from BT Wholesale Ltd. (‘BT Wholesale’), the business unit that manages BT's infrastructure: the internal transfer prices between BT's retail business and BT Wholesale could provide a basis for estimating the rental value.
Poleg tega maloprodajne poslovne enote BT infrastrukturo dejansko oddajajo in omrežne storitve kupujejo od BT Wholesale Ltd. („BT Wholesale“), poslovne enote, ki upravlja infrastrukturo BT: cene notranjega prenosa med maloprodajno enoto BT in BT Wholesale bi bile lahko podlaga za oceno najemne vrednosti.
Moreover, liberalisation and network element unbundling have resulted in a variety of wholesale products which could serve as benchmarks for valuing the rental value of the various infrastructure elements of BT's and Kingston's networks.
Poleg tega sta liberalizacija in razvezava omrežnega elementa privedli do različnih medoperaterskih storitev, ki bi se lahko uporabile kot merila uspešnosti za določitev najemne vrednosti različnih infrastrukturnih elementov omrežij BT in Kingstona.
As to the argument that there is no network nearly as large or diverse as BT's whose rental value could serve as benchmark, the decision to initiate the procedure suggested that the taxation of cable TV companies, which are also active in the telecommunication market, could serve as a benchmark.
V zvezi s trditvijo, da ni omrežja, ki bi bilo vsaj tako veliko ali raznoliko, kot je omrežje BT, in katerega najemna vrednost bi se lahko uporabila kot merilo uspešnosti, je bilo v odločitvi o sprožitvi postopka predlagano, da bi se kot merilo uspešnosti lahko uporabljala obdavčitev podjetij za kabelsko televizijo, ki so prav tako dejavna na trgu telekomunikacij.
As regards the application of the R&E method itself, the Commission noted that this method estimates the rental value of the assets concerned on the basis of the revenues derived from the use of these assets.
V zvezi s samo uporabo metode prejemkov in izdatkov je Komisija navedla, da se najemna vrednost zadevnega premoženja po tej metodi oceni na podlagi prihodkov, ki izhajajo iz uporabe navedenega premoženja.
The result would therefore depend on the level of profitability with which these assets are used, which could lead to results that penalise operators whose assets are valued under a different method.
Rezultat bi bil torej odvisen od ravni donosnosti, s katero se to premoženje uporablja, kar bi lahko pripeljalo do rezultatov, ki kaznujejo operaterje, katerih premoženje je ovrednoteno po drugačni metodi.
The Commission questioned whether the necessary adjustments were made when applying the R&E method to BT and Kingston in order to assume that their assets are used at capacity and profitability.
Komisija je podvomila, da so bile ob uporabi metode prejemkov in izdatkov pri BT in Kingstonu izvedene potrebne prilagoditve, na podlagi katerih bi lahko domnevali, da se njuno premoženje uporablja pri polni zmogljivosti in dobičkonosno.
The Commission also enquired how the universal service obligations are taken into account in the valuation of BT.
Komisijo je tudi zanimalo, kako se pri vrednotenju BT upoštevajo obveznosti univerzalnih storitev.
The decision to initiate the procedure further questioned the method used for revisions of the rateable value.
V odločitvi o sprožitvi postopka je bil izražen tudi dvom o metodi, ki se uporablja pri popravkih obdavčljive vrednosti.
It noted that BT seems to enjoy a downward revision mechanism, while there does not seem to be a similar systematic review of the market conditions faced by competitors.
Komisija je pripomnila, da se zdi, da za BT velja mehanizem popravkov navzdol, medtem ko naj ne bi bilo podobnega sistematičnega pregleda tržnih pogojev, ki veljajo za konkurente.
The apparent failure to take into account the increase in the value of BT's infrastructure between two five-year review periods while charging competitors incrementally as the value of their network increases appears to confer an advantage on BT.
Zdi se, da očitno neupoštevanje povečanja vrednosti infrastrukture BT med dvema petletnima obdobjema pregleda, medtem ko se finančna obveznost konkurentov povečuje skladno z večanjem vrednosti njihovega omrežja, prinaša ugodnost za BT.
Finally, the decision to initiate the procedure underlined the fact that the VOA apparently enjoyed broad discretionary powers, which enable it to negotiate settlements.
In končno, v odločitvi o sprožitvi postopka je bilo poudarjeno dejstvo, da je VOA očitno imela široke diskrecijske pravice, ki so ji omogočile, da je s pogajanji dosegla poravnave.
It underlined that the settlement reached with BT should respect the principle of non-discrimination, and should not unduly discriminate among operators.
Poudarjeno je bilo, da je treba pri poravnavi, doseženi z BT, spoštovati načelo nediskriminacije, zato se ne sme neupravičeno razlikovati med operaterji.
COMMENTS FROM INTERESTED PARTIES
III PRIPOMBE ZAINTERESIRANIH STRANK
Comments from interested parties other than BT and Kingston
A Pripombe zainteresiranih strank, ki niso BT ali Kingston
The comments submitted by interested parties other than BT and Kingston generally support the view that the application of the property tax to BT and Kingston may give them an advantage.
Pripombe, ki so jih predložile zainteresirane stranke, ki niso BT in Kingston, na splošno podpirajo stališče, da odmera davka od premoženja pri BT in Kingstonu zanju lahko pomeni ugodnost.
Vtesse first pointed out that, after the decision taken in March 1998 by the Valuation Tribunal which confirmed that the R&E method had to be applied to BT's network and that its rateable value was GBP 553000000 for England and Wales, BT appealed the decision before the Lands Tribunal.
Vtesse je najprej poudaril, da se je po sklepu marca 1998, ki ga je sprejelo Valuation Tribunal in s katerim je bilo potrjeno, da se je pri omrežju BT morala uporabiti metoda prejemkov in izdatkov ter da je njegova obdavčljiva vrednost za Anglijo in Wales znašala 553000000 GBP, BT zoper sklep pritožil pred Lands Tribunal.
Before the appeal was heard, BT and the VOA settled the valuation at GBP 470000000, which represents a 15 % reduction compared to the initial valuation.
Pred obravnavo pritožbe sta BT in VOA vrednost določila na 470000000 GBP, kar pomeni 15-odstotno zmanjšanje v primerjavi z začetnim vrednotenjem.
Vtesse suggests that BT and the VOA settled a final amount and that the VOA adjusted the numbers to match the agreed result.
Vtesse namiguje, da sta se BT in VOA o končnem znesku dogovorila in da je VOA številke prilagodila tako, da so se ujemale z dogovorjenim rezultatom.
Vtesse put forward new elements that tend to show that the hereditament of BT is under-valued under the R&E method.
Vtesse je predložil nove elemente, iz katerih je razvidno, da so nepremičnine BT po metodi prejemkov in izdatkov ovrednotene prenizko.
Thus, supposing that the rateable value of BT's whole network was attributed to its optic fibre network (7300000 km in 2005), the annual rateable value per km of fibre would be GBP 74.
Če predpostavljamo, da se je obdavčljiva vrednost celotnega omrežja BT nanašala na njegovo omrežje iz optičnih vlaken (7300000 km v letu 2005), bi letna obdavčljiva vrednost na km optičnih vlaken tako znašala 74 GBP.
According to Vtesse, this figure is to be compared to the annual rateable values of GBP 1000 and GBP 1200 per km of optic fibre pair for telecommunication operators that are assessed under the rental method.
Po navedbah Vtesse je treba ta znesek primerjati z letnima obdavčljivima vrednostma v višini 1000 GBP in 1200 GBP na km para optičnih vlaken, ki veljata za telekomunikacijske operaterje, ocenjene po metodi najemnine.
Similarly, setting the value of BT's optic fibre to zero, and given that BT has 29 million final users connections, the annual rent per line would be GBP 18,57.
Če bi vrednost optičnih vlaken BT določili na nič in bi upoštevali, da ima BT 29 milijonov priključenih končnih uporabnikov, bi letna najemnina na vod podobno znašala 18,57 GBP.
This figure is to be compared with the annual GBP 122 paid by telecommunication operators for access to BT's unbundled local loops.
To številko je treba primerjati z letnimi 122 GBP, ki jih telekomunikacijski operaterji plačujejo za dostop do razvezanih krajevnih zank BT.
Vtesse also notes that, in 2001, BT transferred the leasehold and freehold of most of its property portfolio to ‘Telereal’, a joint venture between Land Securities and the Williams Pears Group for GBP 2,4 billion.
Vtesse tudi ugotavlja, da je BT leta 2001 zakupljeno premoženje ter premoženje v trajni in popolni lasti večine svojega premoženjskega portfelja za 2,4 milijarde GBP prenesel na „Telereal“, skupno podjetje Land Securities in Williams Pears Group.
The deal involved 5,5 million sq m in total.
Posel je skupaj obsegal 5,5 milijonov kvadratnih metrov.
Following the deal, BT paid GBP 190 million in annual rents for the freehold plus GBP 90 million for the leasehold in 2001.
Po sklenitvi posla je BT leta 2001 plačal 190 milijonov GBP letne najemnine za premoženje v trajni in popolni lasti ter 90 milijonov GBP za zakupljeno premoženje.
On the basis of this transaction, Vtesse concludes that BT pays GBP 35 per sq m in rents for its buildings, while, according to Vtesse, other telecommunication operators are rated on average at GBP 115 per sq m on their commercial property.
Na podlagi tega posla Vtesse ugotavlja, da BT za svoje zgradbe plačuje 35 GBP najemnine na kvadratni meter, medtem ko je poslovna lastnina drugih operaterjev po navedbah Vtesse obdavčena s 115 GBP na kvadratni meter.
Vtesse asserts that the actual rent paid in 2001 by BT for its buildings to Telereal, i.e. GBP 280 million, represented more than 50 % of its rateable value that year, despite the fact that most of this rateable value should be mainly attributable to its network and not to its buildings.
Vtesse trdi, da je dejanska najemnina, ki jo je leta 2001 BT za svoje zgradbe plačal podjetju Telereal, tj. 280 milijonov GBP, pomenila več kot 50 % njegove obdavčljive vrednosti za tisto leto, čeprav se mora njegova obdavčljiva vrednost v glavnem nanašati na njegovo omrežje in ne na njegove zgradbe.
Vtesse seems to imply that this is evidence that BT's network is undervalued under the R&E method.
Zdi se, da Vtesse namiguje, da je to dokaz, da je bilo omrežje BT po metodi prejemkov in izdatkov ovrednoteno prenizko.
In Vtesse's submission, the discrepancy between the rateable value of the different components of BT's network and those of the networks of the other telecommunication operators proves that the R&E method has resulted in a lower valuation of BT's hereditament than would have been achieved under the rental method.
Po mnenju Vtesse razlika med obdavčljivo vrednostjo različnih elementov omrežja BT in elementov omrežij drugih telekomunikacijskih operaterjev dokazuje, da je metoda prejemkov in izdatkov povzročila nižje vrednotenje nepremičnin BT, kot bi ga dosegli po metodi najemnine.
Vtesse provides further elements to compare the respective burden of business rates on BT and on other telecommunications operators.
Vtesse navaja dodatne elemente za primerjavo zadevnega bremena poslovnega davka za BT in za druge telekomunikacijske operaterje.
Vtesse advocates the rates/receipts ratio, which allegedly amounted to 13,46 % in its case in 2004.
Vtesse zagovarja razmerje med davkom in prejemki, ki je v njegovem primeru leta 2004 domnevno znašalo 13,46 %.
It claims that this ratio must be adjusted in order to allow direct comparison with BT.
Trdi, da je treba to razmerje prilagoditi, da se omogoči neposredna primerjava z BT.
According to Vtesse, since most operators pay significant fees for the carriage and termination of traffic and since those connection fees do not relate to their rateable assets, the fees should be deducted from their receipts when calculating their rates/receipts ratio.
Ker večina operaterjev plačuje visoke pristojbine za prenos in zaključevanje prometa in ker se navedene priključnine ne nanašajo na njihovo obdavčljivo premoženje, je pristojbine po navedbah tega operaterja pri izračunu njihovega razmerja med davkom in prejemki treba odšteti od njihovih prejemkov.
This view is supported by Gamma Telecom which, for the same reasons, argues that the most appropriate ratio for comparing the respective burden of business rates should be the rates/added value ratio.
Enako meni Gamma Telecom, ki zaradi enakih razlogov trdi, da bi moralo biti najprimernejše razmerje pri primerjavi posameznega bremena poslovnega davka razmerje med davkom in dodano vrednostjo.
Furthermore, Vtesse compared the prices of BT's Wholesale Extension Services (‘WES’) with the rates that an operator valued under the rental method would have to pay if it were lighting optic fibres for the purpose of providing the same service.
Poleg tega je Vtesse primerjal cene medoperaterskih storitev razširitve (Wholesale Extension Services) BT z davkom, ki bi ga moral plačati operater, ovrednoten po metodi najemnine, če bi zaradi zagotavljanja enake storitve priključil optična vlakna.
Depending on the capacity and distances of the WES, Vtesse claims that such an operator could have to pay rates worth up to 87 % of the price charged by BT.
Vtesse trdi, da je mogoče, da bi odvisno od zmogljivosti in oddaljenosti storitev razširitve na medoperaterski ravni takšen operater moral plačati davek v vrednosti do 87 % cene, ki jo zaračunava BT.
Vtesse considers that this is further evidence of the fact that BT's optic network is undervalued: if its network were valued in the same way, BT should charge more for its WES in order to cover the real costs of the business rates.
Vtesse meni, da je to še en dokaz dejstva, da je omrežje iz optičnih vlaken BT ovrednoteno prenizko: če bi bilo omrežje BT ovrednoteno enako, bi moral za svoje medoperaterske storitve razširitve zaračunati več, da bi lahko pokril dejanske stroške poslovnega davka.
Vtesse also makes the claim that the rates/receipt ratio is particularly high for new entrants such as Vtesse.
Vtesse tudi trdi, da je razmerje med davkom in prejemki še posebej visoko za nove ponudnike, kakršen je Vtesse.
More established firms can load up fibres with as much traffic as possible in order to amortise the rental and tax costs over as many customers as possible.
Bolj uveljavljena podjetja lahko optična vlakna maksimalno obremenijo s prometom, da stroške najema in davka porazdelijo na čimveč uporabnikov.
BT is not subject to this constraint because allegedly it is not taxed marginally.
Za BT takšen pritisk ne velja, ker domnevno ni obdavčen po zgornji meji.
That means that, for established firms, the rates/receipts ratio will decrease in the long run.
To pomeni, da se bo razmerje med davkom in prejemki za uveljavljena podjetja dolgoročno znižalo.
On the question of marginal taxation, Vtesse emphasises that the disadvantage that it suffers stems from the fact that BT is rated as an indivisible network, while Vtesse is rated on each individual metre of optic fibre cable that it lights.
Glede vprašanja najvišje davčne stopnje Vtesse poudarja, da je v slabšem položaju zato, ker je BT obdavčen kot nedeljivo omrežje, medtem ko je Vtesse obdavčen na vsak posamezni meter kabla optičnih vlaken, ki ga priključi.