natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
In the Staff Working Paper, which was discussed in that meeting, the Commission explained the notion of general measures, that the situation in each individual Member State has to be analysed to define the general excise duty system applicable at national level, and also stated that ‘the draft directive on energy taxation contains numerous options, making it impossible to determine in advance whether or not the way they will be implemented by Member States will give rise to State aid within the meaning of Article 87’.
V delovnem dokumentu služb, ki so ga obravnavali na navedenem sestanku, je Komisija razložila pojem splošnih ukrepov, pojasnila, da je treba za opredelitev sistema splošne trošarine, ki se uporablja na nacionalni ravni, analizirati položaj v vsaki posamezni državi članici, izjavila je tudi, da „vsebuje osnutek direktive o obdavčitvi energije številne možnosti, zaradi česar je nemogoče vnaprej določiti, ali bo njihov način izvajanja s strani držav članic imel za posledico državno pomoč v smislu člena 87“.
Recital (32) of the preamble and Article 26(2) of Directive 2003/96/EC, accordingly, remind Member States of the obligation laid down in Article 88(3) of the Treaty to notify State aid.
Uvodna izjava 32 v preambuli in člen 26(2) Direktive 2003/96/ES države članice opominjata na obveznost uradne priglasitve državne pomoči, določene v členu 88(3) Pogodbe.
In this specific case, neither France, Ireland and Italy, nor any of the beneficiaries have demonstrated that the exemptions fall within the nature and logic of the domestic systems.
V tem posebnem primeru niso niti Francija, Irska in Italija niti noben upravičenec dokazali, da so oprostitve v naravi in logiki domačih sistemov.
None of them has, for example, explained whether dual use of energy products in other production processes has been exempt, and if not, the underlying reasons.
Nobeden ni na primer razložil, ali je bila dvojna uporaba energentov v drugih proizvodnih procesih oproščena, niso podali niti vzrokov, zakaj ni bila oproščena.
Nor have they explained how the exemptions compare to the national taxes on electricity used principally for the purposes of chemical reduction and in electrolytic and metallurgical processes and energy use for mineralogical processes, which are other uses of energy falling outside the scope of Directive 2003/96/EC pursuant to Article 2(4)(b) thereof.
Razložili niso niti, kako se oprostitve primerjajo z nacionalnimi davki za elektriko, ki se uporablja predvsem za kemijsko redukcijo ter v elektrolitičnih in metalurških procesih ter porabo energentov za mineraloške postopke, ki so druge uporabe energentov in v skladu s členom 2(4)(b) Direktive 2003/96/ES ne sodijo v področje uporabe te direktive.
Italy explained that if any other industrial operator had requested the same benefit, it would not have encountered any obstacle to its access to the relevant market.
Italija je razložila, da če bi kateri koli drugi industrijski subjekt zahteval enako ugodnost, ne bi imel nobene ovire za vstop na zadevni trg.
It is, however, not clear what precisely is meant by this statement and whether this means that the same benefit could also be granted to any industry other than alumina.
Ni pa popolnoma jasno, kaj je mišljeno s to izjavo in ali to pomeni, da bi bila enaka ugodnost lahko podeljena kateri koli dejavnosti, ki ni proizvodnja aluminijevega oksida.
In any event the benefit would not be granted with automatically as in the case of alumina.
Kakor koli, ugodnosti ne bi podelili samodejno, tako kot je bilo to pri aluminijevem oksidu.
As regards the reasons for the exemption, Italy, for example, in its letter of 7 December 2000 referred to the ‘recognition of the island (Sardinia) as a strongly disadvantaged region, and the possible negative effects on employment’ (‘reconoscimento dell'isola (Sardegna) quale area fortemente disagiata, ed i possibili effetti negative sull'occupazione’.)
Kar zadeva vzroke za oprostitev, se je Italija na primer v svojem dopisu z dne 7. decembra 2000 sklicevala na „priznanje otoka (Sardinije) kot močno prikrajšanega območja in možnost negativnih učinkov na zaposlovanje“ („reconoscimento dell’isola (Sardegna) quale area fortemente disagiata, ed i possibili effetti negative sull’occupazione“).
As regards the Irish exemption, Article 100 of the Finance Act, 1999 contains some other specific exemptions, but this does not bring the exemption for alumina production within the logic of an overall system.
Kar zadeva irsko oprostitev, vsebuje člen 100 Finančnega zakona iz leta 1999 nekaj posebnih oprostitev, vendar v logiko splošnega sistema ne vključuje proizvodnje aluminijevega oksida.
It rather demonstrates that the exemption for alumina is a particular exemption alongside other specific exemptions, as is also confirmed in the preamble to the Law.
Prej kaže na to, da je oprostitev za aluminijev oksid posebna oprostitev poleg drugih posebnih oprostitev, kar potrjuje tudi preambula zakona.
In addition, the Irish law also excludes potential new entrants from the tax exemption when dual use of energy concerns other production processes.
Poleg tega irska zakonodaja izključuje morebitne nove tekmece iz oprostitve davka, kadar dvojna uporaba energentov zadeva druge proizvodne procese.
With respect to the Irish situation, Aughinish accepts that it ‘does not believe that there are any other such industries (benefiting from an excise reduction like the alumina industry)’ and ‘is also unaware of any allegations of discrimination’.
Aughinish glede irskega položaja priznava, da „ne verjame, da obstaja še kaka takšna industrija [ki uživa ugodnost znižanja trošarin kot industrija aluminijevega oksida]“, in da „tudi ne ve za nobene obtožbe o diskriminaciji“.
This rather tends to confirm the selective nature of the measure.
To precej potrjuje selektivni značaj ukrepa.
In their letter of 7 August 1998, the French authorities indicate that they asked for the derogation from Directive 92/81 in order to ‘put in place an excise regime that does not penalise the sector’ (‘pour pouvoir instaurer un regime d'accise non pénalisant pour le secteur’) (emphasis added).
Francoski organi v dopisu z dne 7. avgusta1998 navajajo, da so zaprosili za odstopanje od Direktive 92/81/EGS, da bi „vzpostavili sistem trošarin, ki ne škoduje sektorju“ („pour pouvoir instaurer un regime d’accise non pénalisant pour le secteur“) (poudarek dodan).
The exemption would be limited to re-establishing the competitive conditions between Péchiney, which has been taken over by Alcan, and the other producers in the Community.
Oprostitev bi bila omejena na vnovično vzpostavitev konkurenčnih razmer med družbo Péchiney, ki jo je prevzel Alcan, in drugimi proizvajalci v Skupnosti.
Article 265bis of the customs code, does not contain similar provisions for energy uses in other sectors.
Člen 265a Carinskega zakonika ne vsebuje podobnih določb za uporabo energentov v drugih sektorjih.
In fact, the Member States and beneficiaries failed to identify any overall logic of their respective tax systems.
Države članice in upravičenci dejansko niso opredelili nobene splošne logike svojih davčnih sistemov.
On the basis of the information available to the Commission, it is clear that the reasons for granting the aid derive rather from the circumstances of alumina production in the specific regions concerned.
Na podlagi informacij, ki jih je imela na voljo Komisija, je jasno, da razlogi za dodelitev pomoči izvirajo bolj iz okoliščin proizvodnje aluminijevega oksida v zadevnih regijah.
These arguments do not derive from the nature and logic of the respective domestic tax systems.
Te utemeljitve ne izvirajo iz narave in logike posameznih davčnih sistemov.
Therefore, the Commission concludes that the exemptions remain highly selective, favouring the production of a specific product and, de facto, specific undertakings and they cannot be justified within the logic of the domestic tax systems.
Komisija zato sklepa, da so oprostitve še vedno izredno selektivne, da dajejo prednost proizvodnji določenega proizvoda in, de facto, posameznim podjetjem ter da jih ni mogoče upravičiti v okviru logike domačih davčnih sistemov.
In conclusion, the exemptions at stake constitute State aid.
Iz tega sledi, da so obravnavane oprostitve državna pomoč.
New aid, not existing aid
Nova pomoč in neobstoječa pomoč
As explained in recitals (65)-(70) of Decision 2006/323/EC, the aid granted as from 1 January 2004 does not constitute existing aid within the meaning of Article 1(b) of Regulation (EC) No 659/1999.
Kot je bilo razloženo v uvodnih izjavah 65 do 70 Odločbe 2006/323/ES, pomoč, dodeljena od 1. januarja 2004, ni državna pomoč v smislu člena 1(b) Uredbe (ES) št. 659/1999.
The claim by Ireland and Aughinish that the exemptions constitute pre-accession aid is in contradiction with the letter of May 1983 by which Ireland accepted that the aid was notifiable within the terms of Article 88(3) of the Treaty.
Trditev Irske in Aughinisha, da so oprostitve predpristopna pomoč, je v nasprotju z dopisom iz maja 1983, s katerim je Irska sprejela, da je pomoč mogoče priglasiti v skladu z določbami člena 88(3) Pogodbe.
In addition, a commitment to make provision for the exemption is not the same as actually granting the aid before accession.
Poleg tega zaveza o določitvi oprostitve ni isto kot dejanska dodelitev pomoči pred pristopom.
Finally, the legislation concerned was fundamentally altered after accession.
In končno, zadevna zakonodaja se je po pristopu temeljito spremenila.
As explained in recital (70) of Decision 2006/323/EC, aid granted by Ireland until 17 July 1990 constitutes existing aid by virtue of the limitation period provided for in Article 15 of Regulation (EC) No 659/1999.
Kot je razloženo v uvodni izjavi 70 Odločbe 2006/323/ES, je pomoč, ki jo je Irska dodelila do 17. julija 1990, obstoječa pomoč zaradi zastaralnega roka iz člena 15 Uredbe (ES) št. 659/1999.
The expiry of the 10-year limitation period does not mean that all aid granted after the expiry of this period also constitutes existing aid.
Iztek 10-letnega zastaralnega roka ne pomeni, da je obstoječa tudi vsaka pomoč, dodeljena po izteku tega obdobja.
The aid was not awarded to Aughinish once and for all in 1983.
Leta 1983 Anghinishu ni bila dodeljena pomoč enkrat in za vselej.
The Statutory Instrument enacted by Ireland to grant the exemption is expressed in general terms as an exemption for alumina manufacture, so as the legislation stands, the exemption would extend to any other alumina producer that commenced production in Ireland.
Zakonsko sredstvo, ki ga je sprejela Irska za dodelitev oprostitve, je s splošnimi izrazi opredeljeno kot oprostitev za proizvodnjo aluminijevega oksida, torej bi se lahko v skladu z zakonodajo oprostitev razširila na vsakega proizvajalca aluminijevega oksida, ki bi začel proizvodnjo na Irskem.
Furthermore, the exemption in respect of Aughinish was not defined at the time the Statutory Instrument was adopted, nor was its value capable of assessment at that time: neither the evolution of the excise duty rates from which Aughinish was exempted, nor the duration of that exemption was defined by the Statutory Instrument.
Poleg tega ob sprejetju zakonskega instrumenta ni bila opredeljena oprostitev v zvezi z Aughinishom, takrat tudi ni bilo mogoče oceniti njene vrednosti: zakonski instrument ni opredelil niti spremembe trošarine, plačila katere je bil Aughinish oproščen, niti trajanja oprostitve.
The exemption therefore falls within the definition of an aid scheme in Article 1(d) of Regulation (EC) No 659/1999, being ‘an act on the basis of which, without further implementing measures being required, individual aid awards may be made to undertakings defined within the act in a general and abstract manner’.
Oprostitev zato sodi v opredelitev sheme pomoči iz člena 1(d) Uredbe (ES) št. 659/1999, ki je „akt, na podlagi katerega je mogoče brez nadaljnjih izvedbenih ukrepov dodeliti individualno pomoč podjetjem, opredeljenim v aktu na splošen in abstrakten način“.
Therefore, the aid consists of a series of grants of aid, made each time Aughinish carried out a customs procedure that would, in the absence of the exemption, have incurred a liability to excise duty.
Tako pomoč sestoji iz vrste dodelitev pomoči, ki so potekale vsakič, ko je Aughinish izvedel carinski postopek, pri katerem bi bilo treba plačati trošarino, če ne bi bilo oprostitve.
Aid granted as from 17 July 1990 therefore does not constitute existing aid pursuant to Article 15 of Regulation (EC) No 659/1999.
Pomoč, dodeljena od 17. julija 1990, zato ni obstoječa pomoč v skladu s členom 15 Uredbe (ES) št. 659/1999.
Compatibility of the aid granted as from 1 January 2004
Združljivost pomoči, dodeljene od 1. januarja 2004
The Commission has examined whether the aid granted by France, Ireland and Italy as from 1 January 2004 qualifies for an exemption from the prohibition of State aid contained in Article 87(1) of the Treaty.
Komisija je proučila, ali pomoč, ki so jo dodelile Francija, Irska in Italija od 1. januarja 2004, izpolnjuje pogoje za izvzetje iz prepovedi državne pomoči iz člena 87(1) Pogodbe.
The aid consists in an exemption from energy tax, and such taxes are not only meant to raise financing for the authorities, but also to reduce the consumption of energy and thereby protect the environment.
Pomoč je sestavljena iz oprostitve plačila energetskega davka in takšni davki niso namenjeni samo temu, da se iz nje financirajo organi oblasti, temveč tudi zniževanju porabe energije in s tem varstvu okolja.
The 2001 Environmental aid guidelines contain rules for exemptions from environmental taxes.
Smernice za okoljsko pomoč iz leta 2001 vsebujejo pravila za oprostitve plačila okoljskih davkov.
For reasons of equal treatment, transparency and legal certainty, these rules are binding upon the Commission.
Zaradi enake obravnave, preglednosti in pravne varnosti so ta pravila za Komisijo zavezujoča.
As regards the period from 1 January 2004, section E.3.2, recitals (47)-(52), of the 2001 Environmental aid guidelines lay down rules applicable to all operating aid in the form of tax reductions or exemptions.
V zvezi z obdobjem po 1. januarju 2004 določajo uvodne izjave 47 do 52 oddelka E.3.2 smernic za okoljsko pomoč iz leta 2001 pravila, ki se uporabljajo za vso pomoč za tekoče poslovanje v obliki zmanjšanja davkov ali davčnih oprostitev.
As explained in recitals (73) and (74) of Decision 2006/323/EC, the excise duties on mineral oils can be considered as environmental taxes, they must be considered as existing taxes within the meaning of point 51.2 of the guidelines, they have an appreciable positive impact in terms of environmental protection within the meaning of point 51.2(a) and they may be considered as if they had been decided at the time the excise tax was adopted.
Kot je razloženo v uvodnih izjavah 73 in 74 Odločbe 2006/323/ES, lahko trošarine za mineralna olja štejejo za okoljske dajatve, treba jih je šteti za obstoječe davke v smislu točke 51.2 smernic, imajo precejšen pozitivni vpliv na varstvo okolja v smislu točke 51.2(a) in lahko se šteje tudi, da je bilo o oprostitvah odločeno že v času sprejetja trošarine.
Consequently, in accordance with point 51.2 of the guidelines, the provisions in point 51.1 can be applied.
Posledično se lahko v skladu s točko 51.2 smernic uporabljajo določbe iz točke 51.1.
Under point 51.1 tax exemptions covering a 10-year period may be authorised.
V skladu s točko 51.1 se lahko odobrijo davčne oprostitve za obdobje desetih let.
After expiry of such a period, and in line with point 23 of the Environmental aid guidelines, the Member States remain free to notify a prolongation of the measures in question to the Commission, which could adopt the same approach in its analysis as the one set out in this point while taking into consideration the positive results obtained in environmental terms through the adoption of taxes.
Po preteku tega obdobja in v skladu s točko 23 smernic o okoljski pomoči lahko države članice Komisiji priglasijo podaljšanje zadevnih ukrepov in ta lahko pri analizi sprejme pristop iz te točke, pri čemer upošteva pozitivne rezultate za varstvo okolja, ki so posledica sprejetja dajatev.
The Irish and Italian exemptions in this case have been granted since 1993 and the French exemption has been granted since 1997, meaning that the measures have been in force for more than 10 years.
Irska in italijanska oprostitev v tej zadevi sta bili odobreni leta 1993 in francoska oprostitev je bila odobrena leta 1997, kar pomeni, da ukrepi veljajo že več kot deset let.
None of the Member States confirmed or denied that the exemptions would continue to be applied after 31 December 2006.
Nobena država članica ni potrdila ali zanikala, da se bodo oprostitve še naprej uporabljale po 31. decembru 2006.
None of the Member States have indicated the presence of a time constraint for the exemptions which currently apply, other than the date of 31 December 2006, which under Community tax law is not a binding constraint, since the exemptions do not fall within the scope of Directive 2003/96/EC.
Nobena država članica ni za oprostitve, ki se uporabljajo, navedla nobene druge časovne omejitve kot datuma 31. december 2006, kar v skladu z davčno zakonodajo Skupnosti ni zavezujoča omejitev, saj oprostitve ne sodijo v področje uporabe Direktive 2003/96/ES.
Nor have any of the Member States notified a prolongation of the measure in question under the Environmental aid guidelines.
Nobena država članica ni niti priglasila podaljšanja zadevnega ukrepa v skladu s smernicami za okoljsko pomoč.
The provisions in the tax legislation of the respective Member States do not seem to contain such limits either.
Kot kaže, takšnih omejitev ne vsebujejo niti določbe davčne zakonodaje zadevnih držav članic.
The Commission considers that in this case, the circumstances referred to in point 23 of the guidelines are still present.
Komisija meni, da so v tem primeru še vedno prisotne okoliščine iz točke 23 smernic.
Therefore, pursuant to point 51.1 of the guidelines, the Commission could authorise further aid, but only on the condition that it becomes subject to a time limitation of maximum 10 years.
Tako bi lahko Komisija v skladu s točko 51.1 smernic dovolila nadaljnjo pomoč, vendar samo pod pogojem, da bi zanjo veljala časovna omejitev največ desetih let.
As explained in recital (75) of Decision 2006/323/EC, the conditions for applying point 51.1(a) of the Environmental aid guidelines are not fulfilled and therefore only the provisions of point 51.1(b) can be applied in this case.
Kot je bilo razloženo v uvodni izjavi 75 Odločbe 2006/323/ES, pogoji za uporabo točke 51.1(a) smernic za okoljsko pomoč niso izpolnjeni in se v tej zadevi uporabljajo zgolj določbe iz točke 51.1(b).
As from 1 January 2004, taxation of mineral oils intended for dual uses, non-fuel uses and mineralogical processes falls outside the scope of harmonised Community measures and therefore, since that date, the exemptions concern domestic taxes imposed in the absence of a Community tax within the meaning of point 51.1(b), second indent, of the Environmental aid guidelines.
Od 1. januarja 2004 obdavčitev mineralnih olj, ki se uporabljajo za dvojno uporabo, uporabo kot negoriv in za mineraloške postopke, ne sodi v področje uporabe usklajenih ukrepov Skupnosti, zato od tega datuma oprostitve zadevajo domače davke, določene v odsotnosti davka Skupnosti v smislu druge alinee točke 51.1(b) smernic za okoljsko pomoč.
That provision requires companies benefiting from the exemptions to pay a ‘significant proportion’ of the national tax.
Navedena določba od gospodarskih družb, ki imajo koristi od oprostitev, zahteva, da plačajo „pomemben del“ državnega davka.
The reason for that is to leave them with an incentive to improve their environmental performance.
Razlog za to je spodbujanje podjetij k izboljšanju njihove okoljske učinkovitosti.
This follows from the wording of point 51.1(b), first indent, of the guidelines, which allows for tax reductions from a harmonised tax if the beneficiaries pay more than the Community minimum rates ‘in order to provide firms with an incentive to improve environmental protection’.
To sledi iz besedila prve alinee točke 51.1(b) smernic, ki dovoljuje zmanjšanje usklajenega davka, če upravičenci plačajo več od najnižjega zneska Skupnosti, „da bi podjetja spodbujali k izboljšanju varstva okolja“.
This also applies where the national tax is significantly higher than comparable taxes in (some) other Member States, as was the case in Italy.
Enako velja, če je državni davek znatno višji kot primerljivi davki v (nekaterih) drugih državah članicah, kot je bilo pri Italiji.
In the practice of the Commission, it has become clear that in general 20 % of the domestic tax or the Community minimum that applies to other energy uses that do fall within the scope of Directive 2003/96/EC (EUR 15 per tonne), can be regarded as a significant proportion, even though the Community minimum does not apply to the energy use at hand.
V praksi Komisije je postalo jasno, da se lahko kot pomemben delež ponavadi šteje 20 % domačega davka ali najnižji znesek Skupnosti, ki se uporablja za druge uporabe energije, ki sodijo v področje uporabe Direktive 2003/96/ES (15 EUR na tono), čeprav se najnižji znesek Skupnosti ne uporablja za trenutno uporabo energije.
Therefore, the Commission considers that only the exemption above 20 % of the domestic tax or above EUR 15 per tonne, whichever is the lowest of the two, can be considered compatible with the common market; the exemption up to the level of 20 %, or up to EUR 15 per tonne, constitutes incompatible aid.
Zato Komisija meni, da se lahko za združljivo s skupnim trgom šteje zgolj oprostitev, ki presega stopnjo 20 % domačega davka ali presega 15 EUR na tono, kar koli je nižje; oprostitev do stopnje 20 % ali do 15 EUR na tono pomeni nezdružljivo pomoč.
Compatibility of the aid pursuant to Article 87(3)(a) of the Treaty and under other provisions
Združljivost pomoči na podlagi člena 87(3)(a) Pogodbe in na podlagi drugih določb
For the reasons explained in recitals (78)-(81) and (82)-(86) of Decision 2006/323/EC, the aid can not be found compatible with the common market under Article 87(3)(a) of the Treaty, nor is it covered by the exemptions set out in Article 87(2) and (3) of the Treaty.
Iz razlogov, razloženih v uvodnih izjavah 78 do 81 in 82 do 86 Odločbe 2006/323/ES, pomoč ne more biti združljiva s skupnim trgom v skladu s členom 87(3)(a) Pogodbe, niti zanjo ne veljajo izjeme iz člena 87(2) in (3) Pogodbe.
Basing the assessment on section E.3.2 of the Environmental aid guidelines is appropriate since the rules in that section take into account economic factors, in particular the risk of a loss of international competitiveness due to the absence of tax harmonisation and even allow for full exemptions for certain firms provided they enter into an agreement with the Member State concerned to improve their environmental performance.
Utemeljevanje ocene na oddelku E.3.2 smernic o okoljski pomoči je ustrezno, ker pravila v navedenem oddelku upoštevajo gospodarske dejavnike, zlasti tveganje za izgubo mednarodne konkurenčnosti zaradi neusklajenosti davkov, in celo dovoljujejo popolne oprostitve za določena podjetja, če se ta z državo članico dogovorijo za izboljšanje okoljske učinkovitosti.
However, in the current cases no such agreements were entered into and therefore a full tax exemption under point 51.1(a) of the Environmental guidelines cannot be justified.
Vendar v teh primerih takšni dogovori niso bili sklenjeni, zaradi česar ni mogoče upravičiti popolne oprostitve davka v skladu s točko 51.1(a) okoljskih smernic.