natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Thus altogether aid of PLN 16184411 was earmarked for TB and subsequently approved under the NRP and Protocol No 8.
Tako je bilo v skladu z NPP in Protokolom št. 8 za TB namenjena in nato odobrena pomoč 16184411 PLN.
Aid received
Prejeta pomoč
According to the independent consultant, in 2002-2003 the company received only PLN 2,235 million (net grant equivalent) in Atate Aid [16].
Po navedbah neodvisnega svetovalca je družba v obdobju 2002–2003 prejela le 2,235 milijona PLN (neto ekvivalent dotacije) državne pomoči [16].
PLN 2,045 million of this aid was set aside for R&D and PLN 190400 for employment restructuring [17].
Od te pomoči je bilo 2,045 milijona PLN namenjenih R in R, 190400 PLN pa prestrukturiranju zaposlovanja [17].
In addition, the 2005 IBP indicated that TB had obtained a budget grant for employment restructuring from 2004 to 2006 of PLN 877000 [18].
Poleg tega je bilo v IPN 2005 navedeno, da je TB dobil dotacijo iz proračuna za prestrukturiranje zaposlovanja med letoma 2004 in 2006 v znesku 877000 PLN [18].
The Polish authorities have explained that the government provided funds to help redundant steel workers re-enter the labour market through training to improve their qualifications or to encourage them to take early retirement by compensating them in part for the low income they would receive while on early retirement.
Poljski organi so razložili, da je vlada zagotovila sredstva, ki naj bi odvečnim jeklarskim delavcem pomagala ponovno vstopiti na trg delovne sile prek usposabljanja za izboljšanje njihovih kvalifikacij ali pa jih spodbudila k predčasni upokojitvi, tako da bi jim deloma nadomestila nizke dohodke, ki bi jih prejemali med predčasno upokojitvijo.
It is based on the December 2003 amendment of the Iron and Steel Industry (Restructuring) Act of 24 August 2001 and stipulated that the sole recipients are the employees (the employer is merely an intermediary which transfers budget funds to redundant workers).
To je temeljilo na spremembi Zakona o železarski in jeklarski industriji (prestrukturiranje) z dne 24. avgusta 2001, ki je bila sprejeta decembra 2003, in je določalo, da so edini prejemniki zaposleni (delodajalec je zgolj posrednik, ki prenese proračunska sredstva odvečnim delavcem).
Failure of restructuring — developments between 2003 and 2006
Neuspešno prestrukturiranje – razvoj dogodkov med letoma 2003 in 2006
The restructuring of TB did not develop as envisaged in the restructuring plan but resulted in bankruptcy in 2006 for several reasons:
Prestrukturiranje TB ni potekalo tako, kot je bilo predvideno v načrtu prestrukturiranja, temveč se je končalo s stečajem leta 2006 zaradi več razlogov:
Waiver of debt
Oprostitev dolga
TB was not able to obtain the debt waivers planned in the IBP.
TB ni mogel doseči oprostitev dolga, predvidenih v IPN.
Cancellation of debts to ZUS, Sosnowiec local authority and the Tax Office amounting to PLN 3392000 was supposed to be awarded on the basis of the Act of 30 August 2002 on the restructuring of some corporate public debt (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act of 30 August 2002’ [19].
Odpis dolgov do ZUS, lokalnega organa v mestu Sosnowiec in davčnega urada v znesku 3392000 PLN naj bi bil priznan na podlagi Zakona o prestrukturiranju dela javnega dolga gospodarskih družb z dne 30. avgusta 2002 (v nadaljevanju „Zakon z dne 30. avgusta 2002“) [19].
This Act made it possible for companies in financial difficulties to restructure public-law liabilities in the form of waivers.
Ta zakon je družbam v finančnih težavah omogočil, da so javnopravne odgovornosti prestrukturirale z oprostitvami.
The company concerned had to lodge an application and restructuring plan with each public authority whose receivables were to be restructured (hereinafter also referred to as ‘the restructuring authorit’y).
Zadevno podjetje je moralo vložiti prošnjo in načrt prestrukturiranja pri vsakem javnem organu, katerega terjatve naj bi prestrukturirali (v nadaljevanju „organ prestrukturiranja“).
The restructuring authority, after reaching the conclusion that the proposed restructuring plan could improve the company’s financial situation, issued a ‘decision on restructuring conditions’ listing the liabilities covered by restructuring.
Organ prestrukturiranja je po ugotovitvi, da bi predlagani načrt prestrukturiranja lahko izboljšal finančni položaj podjetja, izdal „odločbo o pogojih prestrukturiranja“, v kateri so bile naštete odgovornosti, zajete s prestrukturiranjem.
If the company fulfilled all the conditions imposed by the decision, i.e. paid a restructuring fee, presented a restructuring plan and had no other arrears, the restructuring authority was obliged to issue a ‘final’ decision to waive the liabilities listed in the decision on restructuring conditions (the ‘decision on completion of restructuring’).
Če je podjetje izpolnilo vse pogoje, določene v odločbi, tj. plačalo pristojbino za prestrukturiranje, predstavilo načrt prestrukturiranja in ni imelo nobenih drugih zaostalih plačil, je bil organ prestrukturiranja dolžan izdati „končno“ odločbo za oprostitev odgovornosti, navedenih v odločbi o pogojih prestrukturiranja („odločba o dokončanju prestrukturiranja“).
This final decision could, however, be issued at the earliest one year after the adoption of the decision on restructuring conditions and had to be endorsed by the President of the Office for Competition and Consumer Protection (the Polish competition authority, hereinafter ‘OCCP’) as regards the compatibility of the waivers with the State Aid rules.
To končno odločbo pa je bilo mogoče izdati najmanj eno leto po sprejetju odločbe o pogojih prestrukturiranja, predsednik Urada za konkurenco in varstvo potrošnikov (poljski organ za konkurenco, v nadaljevanju „UKVP“) pa je moral potrditi skladnost oprostitve s pravili o državni pomoči.
In the period after the adoption of the decision on restructuring conditions and before the decision on completion of restructuring, companies had to register future waivers as arrears.
V obdobju po sprejetju odločbe o pogojih prestrukturiranja in pred sprejetjem odločbe o dokončanju prestrukturiranja so morala podjetja prihodnje oprostitve evidentirati kot zaostala plačila.
In addition, penalty interest accrued.
Poleg tega so se nabrale zamudne obresti.
The Commission understands that the rationale of this was to allow debt waivers to take place only after it had been shown that the company really was implementing a restructuring programme.
Komisija razume, da je bil cilj tega doseči oprostitev dolga šele po tem, ko je bilo dokazano, da podjetje zares izvaja program prestrukturiranja.
The Commission was informed that ZUS, Sosnowiec local authority and the Tax Office had not implemented such waivers.
Komisija je bila obveščena, da ZUS, lokalni organ v Sosnowiecu in davčni organ niso izvedli takšnih oprostitev.
Plans to waive TB's debts to Sosnowiec local authority (real estate tax liability of PLN 2964000), were rejected by the OCCP because the application had been lodged after 31 December 2003, whereas Protocol No 8 prohibited the granting of State Aid to steel companies after that date.
Načrte za oprostitev dolgov TB do lokalnega organa v Sosnowiecu (dolg davka na nepremičnine v znesku 2964000 PLN) je UKVP zavrnil, ker je bila prošnja vložena po 31. decembru 2003, Protokol št. 8 pa je prepovedoval podelitev državne pomoči jeklarskim družbam po tem datumu.
Therefore, on 28 April 2004 the OCCP stated that the planned waiver could not be granted as it would breach the provisions of Protocol No 8.
Tako je UKVP 28. aprila 2004 navedel, da načrtovane oprostitve ni mogoče odobriti, saj bi pomenila kršitev določb Protokola št. 8.
For the same reasons, on 6 February 2004, the OCCP issued a negative opinion concerning the planned cancellation of TB's debts to PFRON.
Iz istih razlogov je UKVP 6. februarja 2004 izdal negativno mnenje glede načrtovanega odpisa dolgov TB do PFRON.
TB's application for the cancellation of its debts to the Tax Office (PLN 163000) was rejected by the Tax Office.
Prošnjo TB za odpis njegovih dolgov do davčnega urada (163000 PLN) je davčni urad zavrnil.
According to the Act of 30 August 2002, this could happen only if the company did not pay the ‘restructuring fee’ (amounting to 15 % of the value of debts to be waived) or if the company had other arrears to the Tax Office.
Po Zakonu z dne 30. avgusta 2002 bi se to lahko zgodilo samo, če podjetje ne bi plačalo „pristojbine za prestrukturiranje“ (v znesku 15 % vrednosti dolgov, ki naj bi jih oprostili) ali če bi podjetje imelo še druga zaostala plačila do davčnega urada.
Lastly, as shown by the 2005 business plan, restructuring of the debt to ZUS (PLN 265000) failed for financial reasons.
Kot je navedeno v poslovnem načrtu za leto 2005, prestrukturiranje dolga do ZUS (265000 PLN) ni uspelo iz finančnih razlogov.
As explained above (recital (26)) in order to obtain debt cancellation under the Act of 30 August 2002, the company should have repaid, or rescheduled repayment of, all the other public liabilities not subject to restructuring under the Act of 30 August 2002.
Kot je razloženo zgoraj (v uvodni izjavi 26), bi moralo podjetje za odpis dolga po Zakonu z dne 30. avgusta 2002 odplačati vse druge javne obveznosti, ki niso predmet prestrukturiranja po Zakonu z dne 30. avgusta 2002, ali reprogramirati njihovo odplačilo.
That is why the 2002 IBP assumed that debt amounting to PLN 6420000 would be repaid in instalments.
Zato je bilo v IPN 2002 predvideno, da bo dolg v znesku 6420000 PLN odplačan v obrokih.
Hence, the Commission concludes that TB either reached no agreement with ZUS on repayment in instalments or ZUS issued such a decision but TB did not abide by it.
Tako Komisija sklepa, da TB ni dosegel dogovora z ZUS o odplačilu po obrokih ali pa je ZUS izdal takšno odločbo, vendar se je TB ni držal.
Increase in debt
Povečanje dolga
Between 2001 and 2006 TB accrued public debts vis-à-vis ZUS, Sosnowiec local authority, the Tax Office and PFRON.
Med letoma 2001 in 2006 je TB kopičil dolgove do ZUS, lokalnega organa v Sosnowiecu, davčnega urada in PFRON.
The debt began to increase in 2001, rising steadily until December 2002.
Dolg se je začel večati leta 2001 in se je vztrajno povečeval do decembra 2002.
After a short respite, debt continued to accrue between February 2002 and November 2003.
Po kratkem premoru se je dolg spet kopičil med februarjem 2002 in novembrom 2003.
Only between November 2003 and October 2004 was the company in a position to service its debt, probably with a view to meeting the debt cancellation requirements set out in the Act of 30 August 2002.
Samo med novembrom 2003 in oktobrom 2004 je bilo podjetje v položaju, da je lahko odplačevalo svoj dolg, verjetno zaradi izpolnjevanja zahteve glede odpisa dolga, določene v Zakonu z dne 30. avgusta 2002.
However, as of November 2004 the company’s debt started rising again.
Vendar pa se je novembra 2004 dolg podjetja spet začel povečevati.
As a result of its failure to secure waivers, TB had outstanding debts of around PLN 20 million by autumn 2004.
Ker TB ni uspelo zagotoviti oprostitev, je imel do jeseni 2004 približno 20 milijonov PLN neporavnanih dolgov.
This was confirmed in the fourth Polish monitoring report for 2004 of 8 March 2005 which contained a detailed breakdown of the following outstanding liabilities:
To je potrdilo 4. poljsko poročilo o spremljanju za leto 2004 z dne 8. marca 2005, ki je vsebovalo podrobno razčlenitev naslednjih neporavnanih obveznosti:
Debt of TB as indicated in Polish monitoring report of March 2005
Dolg TB, kot je bil naveden v poljskem poročilu o spremljanju iz marca 2005
Public creditors (PLN thousand)
Javni upniki (v tisoč PLN)
Liabilities at end-2003
Obveznosti ob koncu leta 2003
Liabilities at end-2004
Obveznosti ob koncu leta 2004
Liabilities at end-January 2005
Obveznosti ob koncu januarja 2005
Sosnowiec Local authority
Lokalni organ v mestu Sosniwiec
Sosnowiec Tax Office
Davčni urad v mestu Sosniwiec
Accordingly, by end-2004, TB’s debts vis-à-vis public creditors amounted to about PLN 20 million.
V skladu s tem so ob koncu leta 2004 dolgovi TB do javnih upnikov znašali približno 20 milijonov PLN.
The Polish authorities indicated that in 2004 TB had managed to repay about PLN 5 million (PLN 1,2 million to ZUS and PLN 3,8 million to the local authority) from the sale of idle assets.
Poljski organi so navedli, da je v letu 2004 TB uspelo odplačati približno 5 milijonov PLN (1,2 milijona PLN ZUS in 3,8 milijona PLN lokalnemu organu) iz prodaje neangažiranih sredstev.
This notwithstanding, the report indicated that the debt had started to increase again after 2004 and by January 2005 it amounted to PLN 21,1 million.
Ne glede na to je bilo v poročilu navedeno, da se je dolg po letu 2004 spet začel povečevati in se je do januarja 2005 povečal na 21,1 milijona PLN.
The Polish authorities subsequently corrected the amount to PLN 20,761 million at end-2004.
Poljski organi so ta znesek naknadno popravili na 20,761 milijona PLN ob koncu leta 2004.
By 31 March 2005 it had increased to PLN 22,43 million and by 30 June 2005 to PLN 22,91 million.
Do 31. marca 2005 se je povečal na 22,43 milijona PLN, do 30. junija 2005 pa na 22,91 milijona PLN.
Thereafter the company apparently managed to sell some assets and reduced the debt by end-2005 to PLN 20,87 million.
Potem je družbi očitno uspelo prodati nekaj sredstev in do konca leta 2005 zmanjšati dolg na 20,87 milijona PLN.
However in mid-2006 it increased again to PLN 22,11 million, reaching PLN 22,67 million in August 2006, when bankruptcy was declared.
Vendar pa se je ta sredi leta 2006 spet povečal na 22,11 milijona PLN in dosegel 22,67 milijona PLN avgusta 2006, ko je bil objavljen stečaj.
According to the information available to the Commission, TB did not present a comprehensive restructuring plan in 2004 with a view to rescheduling the debt.
Po informacijah, ki so bile na voljo Komisiji, TB leta 2004 ni predložil izčrpnega načrta prestrukturiranja za reprogramiranje dolga.
As creditors, the public authorities have taken steps to enforce their claims, as required by law.
Javni organi so kot upniki sprejeli ukrepe za izterjavo dolga, kot to zahteva zakon.
For example, Sosnowiec local authority and ZUS froze the company’s bank accounts to enforce their claims.
Na primer, lokalni organ v mestu Sosnowiec in ZUS sta zaradi izterjave svojih dolgov zamrznila bančne račune družbe.
However, this was not effective as all funds paid into the accounts are earmarked for payment of salaries.
Vendar pa to ni bilo učinkovito, saj so bila vsa sredstva, vplačana na te račune, namenjena za izplačilo plač.
Therefore the outstanding debt is being enforced mainly by realising charges against real estate and acquiring permanent usufruct.
Zato poteka izterjava neporavnanega dolga predvsem z uveljavljanjem zastavnih pravic na nepremičninah in pridobitvijo trajne pravice uporabe.
In addition, the local authority has apparently obtained the transfer of several assets under Article 66 of the Tax Ordinance.
Poleg tega je lokalni organ očitno dosegel prenos več sredstev po členu 66 davčnega odloka.
In particular, repayment of the debt to ZUS was enforced by obtaining mortgages of PLN 25 million.
Odplačilo dolga ZUS je bilo izterjano s pridobitvijo hipotek v znesku 25 milijonov PLN.
ZUS also has pledges on production assets of around PLN 12 million, of which approximately PLN 9,5 million constitutes first-rank pledges (this includes a first-rank pledge on welding line W-3, worth more than PLN 7 million).
ZUS ima tudi zastavne pravice na proizvodnih sredstvih v znesku približno 12 milijonov PLN, od katerih je približno 9,5 milijona PLN zastavnih pravic prvega razreda (to vključuje zastavno pravico prvega razreda na varilni liniji W-3, ki je vredna več kot 7 milijonov PLN).
In May 2007 the receiver published the list of the acknowledged debts of the bankrupt TB with a total value of PLN 63 million.
Maja 2007 je stečajni upravitelj objavil seznam priznanih dolgov TB v stečaju v skupni vrednosti 63 milijonov PLN.
This amount includes public-law debts, the main creditor being EF, whose liability amounts to PLN 35,9 million.
Ta znesek vključuje dolgove po javnem pravu, pri katerih je glavni upnik EF, katerega jamstvo znaša 35,9 milijona PLN.
TB did not fully implement its investment programme of PLN 25 million as envisaged but spent about PLN 10 million in investments and earmarked some additional funds for R&D.
TB ni v celoti izvedel svojega investicijskega programa v znesku 25 milijonov PLN, kot je bilo predvideno, temveč je za naložbe porabil približno 10 milijonov PLN, nekaj dodatnih sredstev pa namenil R in R.
TB implemented some investments on the basis of its IBP.
TB je izvedel nekaj naložb na podlagi svojega IPN.
In 2003 and 2004 investments were focused on developing the production of tubes for automotive applications.
V letih 2003 in 2004 so bile naložbe usmerjene predvsem v razvoj proizvodnje cevi za avtomobilske aplikacije.
In 2003 it commissioned a line for welding ALU coated tubes (PLN 3207000) and in 2004 a slitting line for manufacturing short pipes (PLN 733000).
Leta 2003 je bila dana v uporabo linija za varjenje cevi, prevlečenih z aluminijem (3207000 PLN), leta 2004 pa rezalna linija za proizvodnjo kratkih cevi (733000 PLN).
In addition, the existing welding lines (PLN 1063000) and some buildings (PLN 1379000, including a heating system) which were necessary for the automotive business were modernised.
Poleg tega je družba posodobila delujoče varilne linije (1063000 PLN) in nekatere zgradbe (1379000 PLN, vključno z ogrevalnim sistemom), ki so bile potrebne za avtomobilski posel.
In total PLN 6,383 million was invested in the automotive business between 2002 and 2005.
Skupno je bilo med letoma 2002 in 2005 v avtomobilski posel vloženih 6,383 milijona PLN.
The Polish authorities have confirmed that all the investments concern assets which have been leased to BA in the meantime [20].
Poljski organi so potrdili, da vse naložbe zadevajo sredstva, ki so bila medtem dana v zakup družbi BA [20].
Some PLN 3,5 million was earmarked for other investments concerning IT systems, purchases of other capital goods and other projects [21].
Približno 3,5 milijona PLN je bilo namenjenih za druge naložbe, povezane s sistemi informacijske tehnologije, nakup drugih investicijskih dobrin in druge projekte [21].
Overall performance of the company
Skupni rezultati poslovanja družbe
TB has not overcome its financial difficulties and has not obtained any bank loans.
TB ni premagal svojih finančnih težav in ni dobil nobenih bančnih posojil.
Throughout the restructuring period TB was unable to obtain financial support from creditors and local financial institutions [22].
Med obdobjem prestrukturiranja TB ni bil zmožen pridobiti finančne podpore upnikov in lokalnih finančnih organizacij [22].
In fact, TB's bank reduced its credit facilities as early as 2003.
Pravzaprav je banka TB zmanjšala njegove možnosti kreditiranja že leta 2003.
This situation was resolved only by the involvement of a financial investor, GFR, which took over a significant number of debts which were converted into long-term loans.
Ta položaj so rešili le z udeležbo finančnega vlagatelja GFR, ki je prevzel precejšnje število dolgov, spremenjenih v dolgoročna posojila.
Despite this, by 2004 TB was once again unable to obtain credit from banks [23].
Kljub temu je bil TB do leta 2004 spet nezmožen dobiti bančna posojila [23].
This is mainly due to the fact that at no point during the restructuring period was TB able to achieve profitability, despite very positive market trends.
To je predvsem zaradi dejstva, da kljub zelo pozitivnim tržnim gibanjem TB med prestrukturiranjem ni nikoli mogel doseči dobičkonosnosti.
In fact, in 2003, as the independent monitoring reports show, TB remained far below its sales target of 48 thousand tonnes of tubes, selling only 30 thousand tonnes [24].
Pravzaprav je leta 2003, kot kažejo neodvisne ocene o spremljanju, TB daleč zaostal za svojim prodajnim ciljem 48 tisoč ton cevi, saj jih je prodal le 30 tisoč ton [24].
In addition, it was struggling with tariffs imposed on wide hot rolled strip, its main feedstock and an unsuccessful price promotion strategy which resulted in reduced revenue.
Poleg tega se je bojeval s tarifami za toplovaljane široke trakove, ki so njegove glavne osnovne surovine, in neuspešno strategijo za promocijo cen, kar je imelo za posledico zmanjšani dohodek.
It therefore ended 2004 with a negative operating margin of PLN 5 million (turnover was PLN 92 million).
Zato je leto 2004 končal z negativnim dobičkom iz poslovanja v znesku 5 milijonov PLN (promet je znašal 92 milijonov PLN).
Consequently, it failed to pass the Commission's viability test.
Posledično ni prestal Komisijinega preizkusa rentabilnosti.
In its January 2004 summary report, the Commission’s independent consultant concluded that TB ‘is effectively trading while being insolvent’ [25].
V svojem zbirnem poročilu iz januarja 2004 je neodvisni svetovalec Komisije ugotovil, da TB „dejansko trguje, medtem ko je plačilno nesposoben“ [25].
In 2004, the third Polish monitoring report of September 2004 also indicated that TB had low financial liquidity and that its financial surplus did not cover repayment of loan instalments with interest, which meant there was a high risk of defaulting [26].
V letu 2004 je tudi 3. poljsko poročilo o spremljanju iz septembra 2004 navedlo, da ima TB nizko finančno likvidnost in da njegov finančni presežek ne pokrije odplačila posojilnih obrokov z obrestmi, kar je pomenilo veliko tveganje, da obveznosti ne bo izpolnil [26].
The fourth Polish report for 2004 contained detailed data on arrears (see recital (34) above) and indicated that the company had not received any support from financial institutions, implemented its planned job cuts or reached forecast productivity levels.
poljsko poročilo za leto 2004 je vsebovalo natančne podatke o zaostalih plačilih (glej zgornjo uvodno izjavo 34) in navajalo, da družba ni prejela nobene podpore finančnih ustanov, izvedla načrtovanega zmanjšanja števila delovnih mest ali dosegla napovedanih stopenj produktivnosti.
As regards the company’s financial standing, it concluded that, ‘of all the group companies, Technologie Buczek Sp. z o.o. was most at risk of losing financial liquidity.
Glede finančnega položaja družbe je bilo v poročilu ugotovljeno, da je bila od vseh družb v skupini v največji nevarnosti za izgubo finančne likvidnosti družba Technologie Buczek Sp. z o.o.
This risk was not mitigated by net profits on business activity, because this did not result in additional revenue.
Tega tveganja niso ublažili niti čisti dobički iz poslovne dejavnosti, saj niso imeli za posledico dodatnega dohodka.
[…] The existence of the risk was demonstrated by the high level of financing assets by debt, including a significant share of arrears to public-law institutions.
[…] Obstoj tveganja je dokazovala visoka stopnja dolgovanih finančnih sredstev, vključno s precejšnjim deležem zaostalih plačil javnopravnim ustanovam.
This situation dissuaded investors from investing in the company, as evidenced by the company’s difficulties in obtaining bank loans.’
Ta položaj je vlagatelje odvračal od naložb v družbo, kar se kaže v težavah družbe pri pridobivanju bančnih posojil.
The Polish view was confirmed by the independent monitoring report of May 2005 [27].
Poljsko mnenje je potrdilo tudi neodvisno poročilo o spremljanju iz maja 2005 [27].
It stated that in 2004, despite the upturn on the steel market and rising steel prices (30 % higher than forecast) TB recorded a negative operating margin and sales were 20 % below forecasts.
V njem je bilo navedeno, da je imela družba leta 2004 kljub pozitivnemu preobratu na trgu jekla in rastočim cenam jekla (30 % nad napovedjo) negativni dobiček iz poslovanja, prodaja pa je bila 20 % pod napovedmi.
Therefore the consultant concluded that, ‘on the basis of its performance in 2003 and 2004, there was a significant risk that the company would not achieve viability by end-2006’ [28].
Zato je svetovalec sklenil, da na podlagi rezultatov poslovanja družbe v letih 2003 in 2004 obstaja precejšnja nevarnost, da družba ne bo dosegla rentabilnosti do konca leta 2006 [28].