natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Of course, in reality the situation is much more complex because of off-balance-sheet items, different risk weightings of assets or zero-risk items, etc. However, the principal reasoning holds.
Seveda je dejansko položaj veliko bolj zapleten, na primer zaradi zunajbilančnih postavk, različnih tehtanj tveganja sredstev ali netveganih postavk. Vendar pa na temeljno razlago to ne vpliva.
The situation does not change if one takes into account the possibility of raising additional own funds up to the same amount of original own funds (a factor of 25 instead of 12,5 for original own funds).
Položaj se ne spremeni, če se upošteva možnost povečanja dodatnih lastnih sredstev do višine temeljnih sredstev (faktor 25 namesto 12,5 za temeljna sredstva).
According to documents provided by the German Government, the corporation tax rate was 46 % in 1992, plus a solidarity surcharge of 3,75 %, i.e. 49,75 % in total.
Glede na dokumente, ki jih je predložila Nemčija, je davek od dobička leta 1992 znašal 46 %, temu pa se je prištel še solidarnostni davek v višini 3,75 % (torej skupno 49,75 %).
The overall tax rate fell to 46 % in 1993 and stood at 49,5 % from 1994 to 2000.
Skupna davčna stopnja je leta 1993 padla na 46 %, med letoma 1994 in 2000 pa je znašala 49,5 %.
From 2001 the overall tax rate was 30 %.
Od leta 2001 je bila skupna davčna stopnja 30 %.
Paragraph 221, see footnote 2.
Glej opombo 2, odstavek 221.
Afterwards €1,1 billion of IBB's special-purpose reserve converted into silent partnership contribution by Land to LBB with normal market remunerationSince 1.1.1999 DEM converted to euro at 1,95583.
Po spremembi 1,1 milijarde EUR rezerve IBB za posebne namene v vložke tihe družbe dežele v LBB pri tržnoprimernem nadomestiluOd 1.1 1999 se DEM v Euro preračunava po tečaju 1,95583.
Figures in DEM must be converted to euro accordingly.
Skladno s tem tečajem je podatke v DEM treba preračunati v Euro.
This report was presented to the Ecofin Council on 23 November 1998 but has not been published.
To poročilo se je predložilo Ekonomsko-finančnemu svetu dne 23. novembra 1998, a ni bilo objavljeno.
It can be obtained from the Competition Directorate-General of the Commission and can also be found on the Commission's website.
Dostopno je na Generalnem direktoratu Komisije za konkurenco ter na spletni strani Komisije.
INFORMATION REGARDING THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE COMMISSION DECISION
INFORMACIJE O IZVAJANJU ODLOČBE KOMISIJE
Calculation of the amount to be recovered
Izračun zneska, za katerega se terja vračilo
Please provide the following details regarding the amount of unlawful state aid that has been put at the disposal of the recipient:
Navedite naslednje podrobnosti o višini zneska nezakonitih pomoči, ki so bile na razpolago upravičencu:
Date(s) of payment [1]
Datum izplačila [1]
Identity of recipient
Identiteta upravičenca
Please explain in detail how the interest payable on the amount to be recovered will be calculated.
Natančno razložite, kako boste izračunali obresti, ki jih je treba plačati za pomoč, za katero se terja vračilo.
Recovery measures planned or already taken
Sprejeti ali načrtovani ukrepi za izvršitev vračila pomoči
Please describe in detail what measures have been taken and what measures are planned to bring about the immediate and effective recovery of the aid.
Podrobno opišite, kateri ukrepi so že bili sprejeti in kateri so načrtovani za takojšnjo in učinkovito izvršitev vračila pomoči.
Please also explain what alternative measures exist in national law to bring about recovery.
Razložite tudi, kateri drugi ukrepi obstajajo v nacionalni zakonodaji za izvršitev vračila pomoči.
Where relevant, please indicate the legal basis for the measures taken or planned.
Navedite pravno podlago za sprejete/načrtovane ukrepe, v kolikor ta obstaja.
By what date will the recovery of the aid be completed?
Do katerega datuma se bo izvršilo vračilo pomoči?
Recovery already effected
Izvršeno vračilo
Please provide the following details of aid that has been recovered from the recipient:
Navedite naslednje podrobnosti o pomočeh, ki jih je upravičenec že vrnil:
Amount of aid repaid
Vrnjeni znesek
Please attach supporting documents for the repayments shown in the table at point 3.1.
Prosimo, priložite dokazila o vračilu zneskov pomoči, ki ste jih podrobno opredelili v zgornji preglednici pod točko 3.1.
(°) Date or dates on which the aid or individual instalments of aid were put at the disposal of the recipient (if the measure consists of several instalments and reimbursements, use separate rows).
(°) Datum, ko je upravičenec dobil na razpolago pomoč ali posamezne obroke pomoči (če ukrep sestavlja več obrokov in nadomestil, uporabite ločene vrstice)
Amount of aid put at the disposal of the recipient, in gross grant equivalent.
Višina pomoči, ki jo je dobil na razpolago upravičenec (bruto ekvivalent dotacije)
(°) Date or dates on which the aid was repaid.
(°) Datum vračila pomoči
Taking the assessment criterion applied by the Commission in Decision 2000/392/EC as a basis, ‘a financial measure must be considered unacceptable to a market-economy investor if the financial position of the company is such that a normal return (in dividends and capital gains) cannot be expected within a reasonable period of time’.
Če pri preiskavi uporabimo merilo Komisije iz Odločbe 2000/392/ES, je „finančni ukrep za vlagatelja v tržnem gospodarstvu nesprejemljiv, če je finančni položaj podjetja takšen, da v primernem času ni pričakovati normalnega donosa (v obliki dividend in povečanja vrednosti).
At issue, therefore, were the return expectations at the time of the investment decision.
Pomemben je donos, ki se ga pričakuje v času odločitve za naložbo.
Moreover, it was erroneous to assume that, with a hypothetical core capital of €1 billion, loans totalling €50 billion could be made. Whereas it was undisputed that IBB's special-purpose reserve performed a guarantee function and a business expansion function on account of its recognition for supervisory purposes, the advantage was confined to the amount actually taken up by LBB.
Sicer pa je napačno izhajati iz tega, da bi bilo pri temeljnem kapitalu hipotetične 1 milijarde EUR mogoče dajati kredite v višini 50 milijard EUR. Sicer je nesporno, da ima rezerva IBB za posebne namene, ker je za potrebe nadzora priznana, funkcijo jamstva in širitve poslovanja, vendar pa je prednost samo v tem, da jo LBB lahko dejansko koristi.
OJ L 319, 29.11.1974, p. 1. Regulation as amended by Regulation (EC) No 1/2003 (OJ L 1, 4.1.2003, p. 1).
UL L 319, 29.11.1974, str. 1, kakor je bila spremenjena z Uredbo 1/2003/ES (UL L 1, 4.1.2003, str. 1).
The BGB group had a balance-sheet total of just under €190 billion in 2001, some €175 billion in 2002 and some €153 billion in 2003. LBB's balance-sheet total was some €87 billion in 2001, some €85 billion in 2002 and some €93 billion in 2003. The Land of Berlin currently holds about 81 % of the shares in BGB.
Skupina BGB je imela leta 2001 bilančno vsoto slabih 190 milijard EUR, leta 2002 približno 175 milijard EUR in leta 2003 približno 153 milijard EUR. Bilančna vsota LBB je leta 2001 znašala približno 87 milijard EUR, leta 2002 približno 85 milijard EUR in leta 2003 približno 93 milijard EUR. Dežela Berlin ima v BGB trenutno 81 % delež.
In 1992 IBB was set up by, among others, the Land as a public-law institution within LBB which was independent in organisational and economic terms but had no authority to act in its own right; it was to act as the central promotion institution of the Land. WBK had until then been an independent public-law institution, with the Land of Berlin bearing institutional and guarantor liability for it. It had been assigned a task in the public interest, namely the provision and maintenance of housing. WBK was now to be transferred with its tasks to IBB, which was given broader promotion-related assignments, e.g. in the fields of infrastructure and environmental protection. The transaction took place on 31 December 1992: WBK was transferred to LBB, with all its assets, by way of universal succession.
Do transakcije, s katero se je WBK s svojim celotnim premoženjem v okviru skupnega pravnega nasledstva prenesel na LBB, je prišlo 31. decembra 1992.
As at the close of 31 December 1992, so with effect on 1 January 1993, all WBK's responsibilities were transferred to IBB, which was itself transferred to LBB. The transferred capital and special-purpose reserve were available to LBB for use as liable core capital as at the close of 31 December 1992 or on 1 January 1993.
Preneseni kapital in rezerva za posebne namene so bili z iztekom 31. decembra 1992 oz. 1. januarja 1993 LBB na razpolago kot rizični temeljni kapital.
on aid from Germany for Westdeutsche Landesbank — Girozentrale (WestLB), now WestLB AG
o pomoči Nemčije za Westdeutsche Landesbank – Girozentrale, sedaj WestLB AG
(notified under document number C(2004) 3925)
(notificirano pod dokumentarno številko C(2004) 3925)
(Only the German text is authentic)
(Verodostojno je samo besedilo v nemškem jeziku)
Having called on interested parties to submit their comments pursuant to the provisions cited above and having regard to their comments,
ob pozivu zainteresiranih strank, da v skladu z zgoraj navedenimi prepisi podajo svoje pripombe in ob upoštevanju njihovih pripomb,
ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE
UPRAVNI POSTOPEK
By a complaint dated 23 March 1993, the Bundesverband deutscher Banken e.V.
S pritožbo z dne 23. marca 1993 je Zvezno združenje nemških bank Bundesverband deutscher Banken e.V.
(‘BdB’), representing about 300 privately owned banks in Germany, urged the Commission to institute proceedings under Article 226 of the EC Treaty against Germany.
(„BdB“), ki zastopa okoli 300 zasebnih bank v Nemčiji, pozvalo Komisijo, da proti Nemčiji začne postopek po členu 226 Pogodbe ES.
It claimed that the German Banking Supervisory Authority (Bundesaufsichtsamt für das Kreditwesen — ‘BAKred’) had infringed Article 4(1) of Council Directive 89/299/EEC when accepting assets of the Wohnungsbauförderungsanstalt des Landes North Rhine-Westphalia (‘Wfa’), which had been merged with Westdeutsche Landesbank Girozentrale (‘WestLB’), as own funds of the latter.
Združenje trdi, da je nemški bančni nadzorni organ (Bundesaufsichtsamt für das Kreditwesen – „BAKred“) kršil člen 4(1) Direktive 89/299/EGS, ko je sredstva zavoda za pospeševanje gradnje stanovanj Wohnungsbauförderungsanstalt dežele Severno Porenje-Vestfalija („Wfa“), ki je bila združen z Westdeutsche Landesbank Girozentrale („WestLB“), priznal kot lastni vir sredstev WestLB.
By letter dated 31 May 1994, BdB informed Directorate-General IV, responsible for competition, of the asset transfer, alleging a distortion of competition in favour of WestLB.
S pismom z dne 31. maja 1994 je BdB obvestil pristojni Generalni direktorat za konkurenco IV o prenosu sredstev in v zvezi s tem o domnevnem izkrivljanju konkurence v korist WestLB.
On 21 December 1994 it filed a formal complaint requesting the Commission to initiate proceedings against Germany under Article 88(2) of the EC Treaty.
decembra 1994 je BdB vložil uradno pritožbo in Komisijo pozval, naj proti Nemčiji začne postopek v skladu s členom 88(2) Pogodbe ES.
In February and March 1995 and in December 1996 ten individual banks associated themselves with the complaint of their association.
Februarja in marca 1995 ter decembra 1996 se je pritožbi združenja pridružilo še deset njegovih bank.
By letters dated 12 January, 9 February, 10 November and 13 December 1993 and 16 January 1996, the Commission asked the German authorities for further information in order to determine whether the asset transfer constituted state aid.
Komisija je v pismih z dne 12. januarja, 9 februarja, 10. novembra in 13. decembra 1993 ter 16, januarja 1996 Nemčijo zaprosila za dodatne informacije, da bi lahko presodila, ali prenos sredstev predstavlja državno pomoč.
The German authorities replied by letters dated 9 February and 16 March 1993, 8 March 1994, 12 April and 26 April 1996 and 14 January 1997.
Nemčija je na njih odgovorila s pismi z dne 8. februarja in 16. marca 1993, 8. marca 1994, 12. aprila in 26. aprila 1996 ter 14. januarja 1997.
A number of further letters and documents were submitted by the different parties.
Različne zainteresirane stranke so posredovale številna nadaljnja pisma in dokumentacijo.
Commission representatives met representatives of the German authorities, WestLB and other Landesbanks as well as of the complainant at various meetings during the period 1994-97.
Predstavniki Komisije so se med leti 1994 in 1997 večkrat srečali s predstavniki Nemčije, WestLB in ostalih deželnih bank ter predstavniki pritožnika.
After this exchange of information, the Commission considered it necessary to initiate proceedings under Article 88(2) of the EC Treaty.
Po tej izmenjavi informacij se je Komisiji zdelo nujni sprožiti postopek v skladu s členom 88(2) Pogodbe ES.
This decision was taken on 1 October 1997.
Ta sklep je sprejela 1. oktobra 1997.
In it the Commission concluded that the measure in question probably constituted state aid within the meaning of Article 87(1) of the EC Treaty and that it needed additional information to carry out the necessary appraisal.
V tem sklepu Komisija ugotavlja, da bi zadevni ukrep lahko predstavljal državno pomoč v smislu člena 87(1) Pogodbe ES in da potrebuje dodatne informacije za presojo postopka.
This information related mainly to the measures taken by the Land of North Rhine-Westphalia (the ‘Land’) to ensure its proper participation in additional profits which WestLB can generate on the basis of the capital transferred, the effects of the inadequate liquidity content of the transferred capital, the effects of the fact that the Land's influence on WestLB had not increased, the effects of the preferential nature of the fixed remuneration and of any other aspect determining the appropriate level of remuneration, the level of Wfa capital available to underpin WestLB's commercial business, the value of the amount exceeding this sum but shown in WestLB's balance sheet, the tax exemptions, the waiver of liability, the profitability of WestLB and the alleged synergies.
Pri tem so jo zanimale predvsem podrobnosti ukrepov, s katerimi si je dežela Severno Porenje-Vestfalija (v nadaljevanju: dežela) zagotovila primerno udeležbo pri dodatnem dobičku, ki ga WestLB lahko doseže na podlagi povečanja kapitala, informacije o posledicah manjkajoče likvidnosti prenesenega kapitala, posledicah okoliščin, da se vpliv dežele na WestLB ni povečal, ter posledicah preferencialnega značaja fiksnih nadomestil in morebitnih drugih dejavnikov pri določitvi primernega nadomestila, informacije o višini kapitala Wfa na razpolago za kritje poslovnih dejavnosti WestLB, o vrednosti zneska, ki presega to vsoto, a je vknjižen v bilanci stanja WestLB, o davčnih oprostitvah, o oprostitvi obremenitev, o donosnosti WestLB in domnevnih sinergijah.
It received comments from WestLB (19 May 1998), the Association Française des Banques (26 May 1998), the British Bankers' Association (2 June 1998) and BdB (4 June 1998).
Komisija je prejela pripombe WestLB (19. maj 1998), Association Française des Banques (26. maj 1998), British Bankers' Association (2. junij 1998) in združenja BdB (4. junij 1998).
By letter of 15 June 1998 it forwarded them to Germany for its reaction, which it duly received by letter of 11 August 1998 after an extension of the deadline.
Slednje je v pismu z dne 15. junija 1998 posredovala Nemčiji, da izrazi svoje mnenje. Nemčija je po podaljšanju roka oddaje odgovorila v pismu z dne 11. avgusta 1998.
Meetings took place with representatives of BdB on 15 January and 16 September 1998 and with representatives of WestLB on 9 September 1998.
Komisija se je 15. januarja in 16. septembra 1998 srečala s predstavniki BdB in 9. septembra 1998 s predstavniki WestLB.
By letters of 22 September 1998, the Commission departments invited the German authorities, WestLB and BdB to a joint meeting on various aspects of the case.
V pismu z dne 22. septembra 1998 so službe Komisije povabile Nemčijo, WestLB in BdB na skupno srečanje o različnih vidikih zadevnega primera.
BdB provided information by letter of 30 October 1998.
BdB je posredoval informacije s pismom z dne 30. oktobra 1998.
The meeting with the three parties took place on 10 November 1998.
Do skupnega srečanja z vsemi tremi strankami je prišlo 10. novembra 1998.
Following that meeting the Commission departments requested additional information and documents from the German authorities and from BdB by letters of 16 November 1998.
Nato so službe Komisije Nemčijo in BdB v pismu z dne 16. novembra 1998 zaprosile za dodatne informacije in dokumentacijo.
By letter dated 14 January 1999, BdB submitted the information requested after an extension of the deadline.
BdB je po podaljšanju roka oddaje predložil želene informacije v pismu z dne 14. januarja 1999.
The German authorities submitted some information by letters dated 15 January and 7 April 1999 after an extension of the deadline.
Nemški organi so po podaljšanju roka oddaje posredovali nekatere informacije v pismih z dne 15. januarja 1999 in 7. aprila 1999.
Since the German authorities refused to provide certain information, the Commission enjoined Germany by decision of 3 March 1999, which was sent to Germany by letter dated 24 March 1999, to submit that information.
Ker Nemčija Komisiji ni želela posredovati določenih podatkov, je Komisija odredila izdajo teh informacij z Odločbo z dne 3. marca 1999, ki je bila Nemčiji vročena 24. marca 1999.
Germany complied with this injunction by letter dated 22 April 1999 after an extension of the deadline.
Nemška vlada je na to zahtevo odgovorila po podaljšanju roka oddaje v pismu z dne 22. aprila 1999.
The Commission decided to arrange for an independent study to be carried out on the appropriate remuneration to be asked by the Land for the transfer of Wfa to WestLB.
Komisija je naročila izdelavo neodvisne študije o primernem nadomestilu, ki bi ga dežela Severno Porenje-Vestfalija morala zahtevati za prenos Wfa na WestLB.
Representatives of the consultancy charged with that task also attended the meeting with the three parties on 10 November 1998 and submitted the study to the Commission on 18 June 1999.
Svetovalno podjetje, pri katerem je bila študija naročena, se je prav tako udeležilo srečanja s tremi strankami dne 10. novembra 1998 in Komisiji 18. junija 1999 predstavilo rezultate te študije.
On 8 July 1999 the Commission adopted Decision 2000/392/EC on the measure implemented by Germany for WestLB in question (the ‘challenged decision’).
Komisija je 8. julija 1999 izdala Odločbo 2000/392/ES o zadevnem ukrepu, ki ga je Nemčija izvedla v korist Westdeutsche Landesbank Girozentrale (v nadaljevanju: izpodbijana odločba).
The decision was notified to Germany on 4 August 1999. Germany forwarded it to the Land by letter of 6 August 1999.
Nemčija je bila z Odločbo seznanjena 4. avgusta 1999 in jo v pismu z dne 6. avgusta 1999 posredovala deželi.
The Land informed WestLB by letter of 9 August 1999, which arrived the same day.
Dežela je WestLB obvestila v pismu z dne 9. avgusta 1999, ki je bilo vročeno še isti dan.
Articles 1, 2 and 3 of the Decision read as follows:
V členih 1, 2 in 3 te odločbe je zapisano:
The State aid which the Federal Republic of Germany has implemented for Westdeutsche Landesbank Girozentrale in the years 1992 to 1998, amounting to DEM 15797 million (EUR 8077 million), is incompatible with the common market.
Državna pomoč v skupnem znesku 1579700000 DEM (807700000 EUR), ki jo je Nemčija odobrila za Westdeutsche Landesbank Girozentrale med leti 1992 in 1998, ni združljiva s skupnim trgom.
Germany shall take all necessary measures to discontinue and recover from the beneficiary the aid referred to in Article 1 and unlawfully made available to the beneficiary.
Nemčija sprejme vse potrebne ukrepe, da prejemnik vrne pomoč, navedeno v členu 1 in dano na razpolago nezakonito.
Recovery shall be affected in accordance with the procedures of national law.
Izterjava pomoči se izvede v skladu s postopki nacionalne zakonodaje.
The aid to be recovered shall include interest from the date on which it was at the disposal of the beneficiary until the date of its recovery.
Znesek, ki se mora vrniti, vključuje obresti, ki se plačajo od datuma, ko je bila nezakonita pomoč prejemnici na razpolago, do dejanskega vračila.
Germany shall inform the Commission, within two months of notification of this decision, of the measures taken to comply with it.’
Nemčija obvesti Komisijo v dveh mesecih po objavi te odločbe o ukrepih, sprejetih za izvajanje te odločbe.“
COURT PROCEDURE
SODNI POSTOPEK
On 12 October 1999 WestLB and the Land of North Rhine-Westphalia challenged this decision before the Court of First Instance of the European Communities.
WestLB in dežela Severno Porenje-Vestfalija sta 12. oktobra 1999 na Sodišču prve stopnje Evropskih skupnosti vložili pritožbo zoper to odločbo.
WestLB, the Land and Germany as intervening party requested that the challenged decision be annulled and that the Commission bear the procedural costs.
WestLB, dežela in Nemčija kot sospornik so zahtevali, da se izpodbijana odločba razveljavi, stroški postopka pa naložijo Komisiji.
In addition, the Land requested that BdB bear its own costs.
Poleg tega je dežela zahtevala, da svoje lastne stroške naloži združenju BdB.
The Commission and the BdB as intervening party requested that both legal challenges be rejected as unfounded and that the complainants bear the procedural costs (the BdB here included its own costs).
Komisija in BdB kot sospornik sta zahtevala, da se obe pritožbi zavrneta kot neutemeljeni, stroški postopka pa (BdB je pri tem vključil svoje lastne stroške) naložijo tožnikom.
In addition, Germany challenged this decision before the Court of Justice of the European Communities on 8 October 1999, likewise requesting that it be annulled and that the Commission bear the procedural costs.
Poleg tega je Nemčija 8. oktobra 1999 na Sodišču Evropskih skupnosti vložila pritožbo zoper to odločbo, prav tako z zahtevo, da se slednja razveljavi, Komisiji pa naložijo stroški postopka.
The challenge was, however, suspended on account of the substantially identical procedure before the Court of First Instance.
Vendar je bil ta postopek glede na vsebinsko enakost postopka pred Sodiščem prve stopnje odložen.
The Court decided on 22 August 2000 to admit Germany as intervening party supporting the applicants and the BdB as intervening party supporting the Commission.
Sodišče je s sklepom z dne 22. avgusta 2000 priznalo Nemčijo kot sospornico v podporo tožnikov in BdB kot sospornika v podporo Komisiji kot toženki.
By decision of the Court of 11 July 2001, the two cases were joined for the purposes of an oral hearing and ruling.
S sklepom Sodišča z dne 11. julija 2001 sta bili obe pravni zadevi povezani s skupnim ustnim zaslišanjem in skupno odločitvijo.
The hearing took place on 5 and 6 June 2002.
Ustno zaslišanje je potekalo 5. in 6. junija 2002.
On 6 March 2003 the Court of First Instance delivered a ruling annulling the challenged decision and ordering the Commission to pay the costs of the applicants and to bear its own costs and Germany and the BdB to bear their own costs.
Sodišče prve stopnje je 6. marca 2003 izreklo sodbo, v kateri je izpodbijano odločbo razveljavilo in Komisiji naložilo stroške tožnikov ter njene lastne stroške, Nemčiji in BdB pa naložila njune lastne stroške.
The Court annulled the Commission decision on the ground of insufficient justification of two points regarding calculation of the appropriate remuneration.
Sodišče je Odločbo Komisije razveljavilo zaradi nezadostnih razlogov v naslednjih dveh točkah glede izračuna višine primernega nadomestila.
Firstly, the annulment was based on the reasons stated for the remuneration for liquid equity capital as the starting point for the calculation, for which the Commission had set a rate of 12 % per annum (after corporation tax and before investor taxes).
Po eni strani se je Odločba razveljavila glede na utemeljitev višine nadomestila za likviden osnovni kapital kot izhodišče izračuna, za katerega je Komisija določila obrestno mero 12 % letno (po obdavčitvi dobička in pred obdavčitvijo naložbe).