natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
No distortion of competition was found to be at the root of the operator’s withdrawal.
Vendar njihove ugotovitve niso pokazale morebitnega izkrivljanja konkurence, kar bi bil lahko razlog za umik tega izvajalca.
Moreover, the falling turnover of some operators was due to the steadily increasing competition from low-cost airlines and not to the commissioning of new vessels by other shipowners.
Razen tega bi lahko znižanje prihodka nekaterih izvajalcev izhajalo iz stalnega večanja konkurence nizkocenovnih letalskih družb in ne nedavnega začetka uporabe plovil s strani drugih upravljavcev plovil.
As for the call by one of those interested parties for the Commission to extend the scope of its investigation to include the co-ownership shares scheme, the French authorities pointed out that that scheme had been declared compatible with the Treaty rules in the Commission’s decision of 3 May 1996.
Kar zadeva željo ene od zainteresiranih strank, da bi Komisija razširila področje preiskave na ureditev skupnega vlaganja, francoski organi poudarjajo, da je bilo v Odločbi z dne 3. maja 1996 ugotovljeno, da je ta ureditev v skladu s pravili Pogodbe.
Lastly, in the French authorities’ opinion, the increase in cross-Channel capacity was not attributable to companies which had benefited under the tax EIG scheme.
Zmogljivosti prometa čez Rokavski preliv se ni povečala zaradi družb, ki so imele korist od sheme davčnih gospodarskih interesnih združenj.
Account should be taken instead of new entrants on the routes on which the incumbent operators had previously operated.
V tem smislu bi bilo treba upoštevati nove izvajalce na linijah, na katerih so prej delovali stari izvajalci.
The French authorities also pointed out that Eurotunnel had doubled its freight-handling capacity between 2000 et 2003 and that P&O had bought out Stena Line’s share of their joint venture and had modernised its fleet.
Francoski organi v tem smislu opozarjajo tudi, da je družba Eurotunnel zmogljivost prevoza tovora med leti 2000 in 2003 podvojila ter da je družba P&O odkupila lastniške deleže od izvajalca Stena-Line in prenovila svojo floto.
Following the initiation of the formal investigation procedure under Article 88(2) of the Treaty and bearing in mind the arguments put forward in that context by the French authorities and by interested parties, the Commission takes the view that the tax scheme provided for in Article 39 CA of the General Tax Code constitutes state aid within the meaning of Article 87(1) of the Treaty.
V skladu s formalnim postopkom preiskave, ki je bil sprožen na podlagi člena 88(2) Pogodbe, in ob upoštevanju predstavljenih argumentov francoskih organov in zainteresiranih strank, Komisija ocenjuje, da davčna shema iz člena 39 CA Splošnega zakonika o davkih pomeni državno pomoč v smislu člena 87(1) Pogodbe.
Pursuant to Article 87(1) of the Treaty, ‘any aid granted by a Member State or through State resources in any form whatsoever which distorts or threatens to distort competition by favouring certain undertakings or the production of certain goods shall, in so far as it affects trade between Member States, be incompatible with the common market’.
V skladu s členom 87(1) Pogodbe je „pomoč, ki jo dodeli država članica, ali kakršna koli vrsta pomoči iz državnih sredstev, ki izkrivlja ali bi lahko izkrivljala konkurenco z dajanjem prednosti posameznim podjetjem ali proizvodnji posameznega blaga, nezdružljiva s skupnim trgom, kolikor prizadene trgovino med državami članicami“.
The classification of a national measure as state aid presupposes that the following cumulative conditions are met: (1) the measure confers an advantage through state resources; (2) the advantage is selective; and (3) the measure distorts or threatens to distort competition and is capable of affecting trade between Member States.
S tem ko se nacionalni ukrep označi kot državna pomoč, je predvideno, da se izpolnijo naslednji skupni pogoji, in sicer: 1. zadevni ukrep daje prednost pomoči iz državnih sredstev, 2. ta ugodnost je selektivna in 3. zadevni ukrep izkrivlja ali bi lahko izkrivljal konkurenco ter lahko prizadene trgovino med državami članicami.
The reasons why it is considered that the scheme provided for in Article 39 CA of the General Tax Code, as described above, satisfies these cumulative conditions need to be explained.
Izpostaviti je treba razloge, ki omogočajo ugotovitev, da opisana shema iz člena 39 CA Splošnega zakonika o davkih izpolnjuje skupne pogoje.
The existence of an advantage conferred through state resources
Obstoj ugodnosti, dodeljene z državnimi sredstvi
The second paragraph of Article 39 C and Article 39 CA of the General Tax Code concern the depreciation rules applicable to the financing, notably by EIGs, of assets leased out or otherwise made available.
Drugi pododstavek člena 39 C in člen 39 CA Splošnega zakonika o davkih zadevata pravila amortizacije, ki jih gospodarska interesna združenja uporabljajo za financiranje najetih ali drugače zagotovljenih sredstev.
According to the French authorities, these two provisions were introduced with a view to combating abusive recourse to this method of financing.
V skladu z mnenjem francoskih organov sta bili ti določbi uvedeni za preprečevanje zlorabe te vrste financiranja.
The French authorities and a number of interested parties claim that the scheme provided for in Article 39 CA of the General Tax Code corresponds to a return to the ordinary law in relation to the deduction of depreciation, that is to say, to the provisions of the second paragraph of Article 39(1) and the first paragraph of Article 39 C of the said Code, and therefore does not constitute state aid.
Francoski organi in zainteresirane stranke trdijo, da je shema iz člena 39 CA Splošnega zakonika o davkih v skladu s skupnim pravom na področju odbitka amortizacije, torej z določbami iz drugega pododstavka člena 39(1) in prvega pododstavka člena 39 C omenjenega zakonika, in torej ne pomeni državne pomoči.
The second paragraph of Article 39 C of the General Tax Code constitutes, in their view, an exception to the provisions contained in those articles.
Drugi pododstavek člena 39 C Splošnega zakonika o davkih bi pomenil odstopanje od določb teh členov.
According to settled case law, the application of Article 87(1) of the Treaty only requires it to be determined whether under a particular statutory scheme a state measure is such as to favour ‘certain undertakings or the production of certain goods’ over others which are in a legal and factual situation that is comparable in the light of the objective pursued by that scheme.
V skladu z ustaljeno sodno prakso je treba za izvajanje člena 87(1) Pogodbe le opredeliti, ali v okviru določene pravne ureditve državni ukrep spodbuja „posamezna podjetja ali proizvodnjo“, da so v primerjavi z drugimi glede na načrtovani cilj te sheme v primerljivem dejanskem in pravnem položaju.
Consequently, in order to identify what constitutes an advantage as contemplated in the case law on state aid, it is imperative to determine the reference point or the common system applicable, under a particular statutory scheme, against which that advantage is to be compared.
Zato je treba za opredelitev te ugodnosti v smislu sodne prakse v zvezi s pojmom državne pomoči nujno določiti referenčno pravilo ali veljavno skupno shemo v okviru danega pravnega okvira, s katerim se bo ta ugodnost primerjala.
In this respect, the Court of Justice has ruled, moreover, that the determination of the reference framework is of particular importance in the case of tax measures since the very existence of an advantage may be established only when compared with ‘normal’ taxation, i.e. the rate of taxation in force in the geographical area constituting the reference framework.
V zvezi s tem je Sodišče ocenilo tudi, da ima določitev referenčnega okvira v primeru davčnih ukrepov vedno večji pomen, ker se ugodnost lahko uveljavi le v zvezi z uvedbo „normalnega“ obdavčenja, in sicer z veljavno stopnjo obdavčenja na referenčnem geografskem območju.
In the present case, in order to determine the reference point under the scheme of depreciation of assets leased out or otherwise made available, account need be taken only of the provisions on the financing of such assets by partnerships such as EIGs.
Torej je treba v tem primeru za določitev tega referenčnega pravila v okviru sheme amortizacij najetih ali drugače zagotovljenih sredstev, upoštevati le določbe, ki se nanašajo na financiranje teh sredstev, ki ga zagotavljajo partnerstva, kot so gospodarska interesna združenja.
Otherwise, the factual and legal situations taken into consideration for the purpose of determining the advantage would not be comparable, either from the point of view of the members of the EIG or from that of the users of the assets in question.
V nasprotnem primeru dejanske in sodne razmere, ki se upoštevajo za določitev ugodnosti, niso primerljive niti s stališča članov gospodarskih interesnih združenj niti s stališča uporabnikov zadevnih sredstev.
Hence the reference point applicable in the present case for determining the deductible depreciation is the limitation in principle of such depreciation to assets financed by EIGs, as provided for in the second paragraph of Article 39 C of the General Tax Code.
Torej je v tem primeru veljavno referenčno pravilo, ki zadeva določitev amortizacije, ki se lahko odšteje, omejitev načela te amortizacije za sredstva, ki jih financirajo gospodarska interesna združenja, iz drugega pododstavka člena 39 C Splošnega zakonika o davkih.
The criterion cannot be the first paragraph of Article 39 C of the General Tax Code inasmuch as that provision is not applicable to financing operations by EIGs, that is to say, by structures grouping together several legal entities — as a rule financial institutions — which thus share between them the risks inherent in an operation, as opposed to a financing operation carried out by a single financial institution bearing on its own the risks involved.
Pri tem se prvi pododstavek člena 39 C Splošnega zakonika o davkih ne sme obravnavati, ker ta določba ne velja za finančne postopke gospodarskih interesnih združenj, torej struktur, ki združujejo več pravnih subjektov, na splošno finančnih ustanov, ki si med sabo razdelijo tveganja pri postopkih, v nasprotju s finančnim postopkom, ki ga izvaja ena sama finančna ustanova, ki sama prevzame zadevna tveganja.
It should be pointed out further in this connection that, unlike financing methods which do not entail recourse to an EIG, a financing operation using as an intermediary such a tax-transparent structure makes it possible to achieve tax optimisation, any losses posted by an EIG during the first few years of its activity being deductible from the taxable profits earned by its members from their current activities.
Zato je treba prav tako navesti, da v nasprotju z načini financiranja, ki ne vključujejo gospodarskega interesnega združenja, finančni postopki takšne davčno pregledne strukture omogočajo davčno optimizacijo, primanjkljaji, ki jih je gospodarsko interesno združenje zabeležilo v prvih letih dejavnosti, pa se odštejejo od obdavčljivih prihodkov iz tekočih dejavnosti njegovih članov.
The Commission considers, therefore, that the French authorities and certain interested parties are not justified in maintaining that the scheme provided for in Article 39 CA of the General Tax Code constitutes a return to the ordinary law on depreciation, and that the second paragraph of Article 39 C of the said Code constitutes the reference point against which the tax advantage resulting from the application of Article 39 CA is to be assessed. It is relevant to note, moreover, that Article 39 CA of the General Tax Code provides expressly that the tax advantage in question is to be calculated from the balance of the positive or negative discounted values relating respectively to the tax reductions or additional tax contributions, compared with those which would result from the application of the provisions of the second paragraph of that article.
Komisija torej ocenjuje, da francoski organi in nekatere zainteresirane stranke neupravičeno zatrjujejo, da je shema iz člena 39 CA Splošnega zakonika o davkih v skladu s skupnim pravom amortizacij in da je drugi pododstavek člena 39 C tega zakonika referenčna shema, na podlagi katere je treba oceniti davčno ugodnost, ki izhaja iz uporabe člena 39 CA. Razen tega je primerno poudariti, da člen 39 CA Splošnega zakonika o davkih izrecno predvideva, da se zadevna davčna ugodnost izračuna z ostankom dejanskih pozitivnih ali negativnih vrednosti omejitev ali dodatnih davčnih prispevkov v primerjavi s tistimi, ki jih povzroča uporaba določb iz drugega pododstavka tega člena.
It should be pointed out that only members of EIGs which finance movable assets the depreciation period of which is at least eight years qualify for the tax advantages resulting from the application of Article 39 CA of the General Tax Code, namely, (1) exemption from the ceiling in principle on deductible depreciation, (2) the one-point increase in the depreciation coefficient, and (3) possible exemption from transfer capital gains tax.
V zvezi z ugodnostmi, ki izhajajo iz uporabe člena 39 CA Splošnega zakonika o davkih, je treba poudariti, da lahko le člani gospodarskega interesnega združenja, ki financira premičnine v obdobju amortizacije, krajšem od 8 let, pridobijo davčne ugodnosti, ki izhajajo iz uporabe člena 39 CA Splošnega zakonika o davkih, to so 1. odstopanje od zgornje meje amortizacije, ki se lahko odšteje, 2. povečanje koeficienta amortizacije za eno točko in 3. možna oprostitev davka na kapitalske dobičke iz prenosa sredstev.
As regards, firstly, the removal of the ceiling on deductible depreciation pursuant to Article 39 CA of the General Tax Code, it should be noted that each member of an EIG is able, during the period of depreciation of the asset when the EIG is posting a loss, to deduct the EIG’s losses, in proportion to its rights, from its own taxable profits.
Na eni strani je treba v zvezi z odpravo zgornje meje amortizacije, ki se lahko odšteje, v skladu s členom 39 CA Splošnega zakonika o davkih opozoriti, da lahko vsak član gospodarskega interesnega združenja v obdobju amortizacije sredstva, v katerem so rezultati gospodarskega interesnega združenja slabi, primanjkljaje gospodarskega interesnega združenja odšteje od svojih obdavčljivih prihodkov, sorazmerno s svojimi pravicami.
No account is taken, in this context, of the ceiling on depreciation laid down in the second paragraph of Article 39 C of the General Tax Code.
V tem smislu se ne upošteva zgornja meja amortizacije iz drugega pododstavka člena 39 C Splošnega zakonika o davkih.
Consequently, the application of the exception provided for in Article 39 CA of the General Tax Code makes possible, during the loss-making period, a reduction, by each of the EIG’s members, of the base which would normally be taxable under the second paragraph of Article 39 C of the General Tax Code.
Zato uporaba odstopanja iz člena 39 CA Splošnega zakonika o davkih v času primanjkljaja omogoča, da se vsakemu članu gospodarskega interesnega združenja zmanjša osnova, ki bi bila običajno obdavčljiva v skladu z drugim pododstavkom člena 39 C Splošnega zakonika o davkih.
The fact that the amount of the depreciation is not limited to the amount of the leasing charges collected, less any other charges relating to the leased asset, makes it possible to increase the amount of the depreciation during the first few loss-making financial years.
Dejstvo, da znesek amortizacije ni omejen z zneskom prejete najemnine, od katere se odštejejo drugi stroški v zvezi z najetim sredstvom, omogoča povečanje zneska amortizacije v prvih proračunskih letih s primanjkljajem.
The fact that, pursuant to Article 39 CA of the General Tax Code, such losses are only deductible to the tune of one quarter of the profits taxable at the normal rate of corporation tax which each member of the EIG earns from the rest of its activities may limit that advantage, but it cannot call into question its existence.
Zato lahko seveda položaj, v katerem se v skladu s členom 39 CA Splošnega zakonika o davkih ti primanjkljaji odštejejo le v višini četrtine prihodkov, obdavčljivih po davčni stopnji za družbe po splošnem pravu, ki jih vsak član gospodarskega interesnega združenja pridobi pri izvajanju drugih dejavnosti, omeji to ugodnost, vendar ne sme povzročiti dvoma o njenem obstoju.
The French authorities maintain in this respect that the tax savings thus obtained during the first few years of the financing operation are neutralised by the additional tax payable once the EIG starts to make a profit, the leasing charges payable being greater than the annual depreciation expense.
Francoski organi v tem smislu ocenjujejo, da davčne prihranke, pridobljene v prvih letih postopka financiranja, nevtralizirajo dodatni davki, ki so bili ugotovljeni, ko je gospodarsko interesno združenje začelo pridobivati koristi, in sicer najemnine, ki so presegle letni obrok amortizacije.
The Commission considers, however, that the advantage gained lies in the delayed payment of tax and corresponds to the balance of the discounted values of the taxes paid throughout the depreciation period taking into account the interest rates applied.
Vendar Komisija ocenjuje, da pomeni pridobljena ugodnost odlog plačila davka in ustreza preostanku dejanske vrednosti plačanih davkov v skupnem obdobju amortizacije, ob upoštevanju veljavnih obrestnih mer.
Senate Report No 413 confirms this analysis when it states that ‘[t]he tax savings thus obtained by the members during the first few years of operation are offset by the additional tax payable thereafter when the financing structure earns profits’.
Razen tega poročilo Senata št. 413 potrjuje to analizo, ker navaja, da davčne prihranke, ki jih tako pridobijo člani v prvih letih uporabe, nadomestijo dodatni davki, ki nastanejo potem, ko se s strukturo financiranja ustvari dobiček.
However, this time-lag makes it possible, so the report says, to achieve an increase in cash flow equal to the difference between the discounted values of the tax savings for the first few years and the additional tax contributions in subsequent years.
Toda ta časovni zamik v skladu s tem poročilom omogoči sprostitev dobička iz državne blagajne, ki ustreza razliki med dejanskimi vrednostmi davčnih prihrankov iz prvih proračunskih let in dodatnimi davčnimi prispevki iz zadnjih proračunskih let.
The Commission would also point out that it is stated in Tax Instruction No 120 of 17 June 1999 that the tax advantage resulting from the application of Article 39 CA of the General Tax Code makes it possible to achieve tax savings.
Komisija tudi poudarja, da je v davčnem predpisu št. 120 z dne 17. junija 1999 navedeno, da davčna ugodnost, ki izhaja iz uporabe člena 39 CA Splošnega zakonika o davkih, omogoča nastanek davčnih prihrankov.
It would appear, therefore, that the scheme introduced by Article 39 CA of the General Tax Code seeks to enable the members of an EIG to enjoy an advantage in the form of a tax deferment.
Torej se zdi, da je namen sheme, vzpostavljene s členom 39 CA Splošnega zakonika o davkih, omogočiti članom gospodarskega interesnega združenja, da izkoristijo ugodnost v obliki odloga plačila davkov.
No support can be given to the argument that users for whom an EIG does not receive approval pursuant to Article 39 CA of the General Tax Code have recourse to other methods of financing in order to circumvent the tax-deductible depreciation ceiling provided for in the second paragraph of Article 39 C of the Code and are therefore not placed at a disadvantage compared with those for whom the EIG does receive approval.
V tem pogledu ni možno podpreti argumenta, da imajo uporabniki, od katerih gospodarsko interesno združenje ne pridobi soglasja iz člena 39 CA Splošnega zakonika o davkih, možnost drugih načinov financiranja, s katerimi se izognejo zgornji meji amortizacije, ki se lahko odšteje od plačila davka, iz drugega pododstavka člena 39 C tega zakonika, in niso prikrajšani v primerjavi z uporabniki, od katerih gospodarsko interesno združenje ne prejme soglasja.
It should be pointed out first of all that, in the case of an aid scheme, the Commission may confine itself to examining the general characteristics of the scheme in question without being required to examine each particular case in which it applies.
Najprej je treba opozoriti, da se lahko glede sheme pomoči Komisija omeji na preučevanje splošnih značilnosti zadevne sheme, ne da bi morala preučevati vsak primer uporabe posebej.
Secondly, such an argument means having to take into account individual situations which are factually and legally distinct and, what is more, hypothetical.
Razen tega bi se na podlagi takega obravnavale posamezne situacije, ki se razlikujejo z dejanskega in pravnega vidika ter so tudi hipotetične.
Lastly, it cannot be ruled out that users who cannot benefit from the provisions of Article 39 CA of the General Tax Code may be unable to have recourse to an alternative method of financing.
Ni mogoče izključiti možnosti, da uporabniki, ki ne morejo uživati ugodnosti iz določb člena 39 CA Splošnega zakonika o davkih, ne morejo izkoristiti nadomestnega načina financiranja.
This might be the case where a bank decided, in the light of the financial situation of the undertaking concerned, not to assume alone the risks inherent in the financing operation (leasing in its own right) or where, for reasons to do with the user’s balance sheet structure or financing capacity, other financing methods proved impossible (direct investment with recourse to debt or equity).
Tako je lahko zlasti v primeru, če se je banka ob upoštevanju finančnega stanja zadevnega podjetja odločila, da sama ne prevzame tveganj, ki nastanejo pri postopku financiranja (lastno kreditno financiranje najema), oziroma če so se zaradi strukture bilance stanja ali zmožnosti financiranja uporabnikov drugi načini financiranja izkazali za nemogoče (neposredne naložbe s pomočjo posojila ali lastnih sredstev).
At all events, even if such users were actually able to have recourse to an alternative financing method and thereby circumvented their depreciation ceiling, the fact remains that the most advantageous solution initially chosen would have to be abandoned in favour of a necessarily less favourable second choice and that they would not benefit from the tax treatment specific to leasing out by an EIG (in the form of the obligation laid down in Article 39 CA of the General Tax Code to pass on part of the tax advantage to the user).
Če se v vsakem primeru predpostavi, da lahko ti uporabniki dejansko izkoristijo nadomestni način financiranja in v tem smislu odpravijo zgornjo mejo amortizacije, je treba najugodnejšo prvotno izbrano rešitev vseeno opustiti v korist druge izbire, ki je neizogibno manj ugodna, ter da nimajo koristi od obdavčenja, značilnega za kreditno financiranje najema s strani gospodarskega interesnega združenja (zaradi predpisane obveznosti vračanja iz člena 39 CA Splošnega zakonika o davkih).
Besides the removal of the ceiling on the amount of deductible depreciation, the members of an EIG benefit from a one-point increase in the declining depreciation coefficient and, in the event of early transfer of title in the asset to the user and provided certain conditions are met, from exemption from capital gains tax.
Pa drugi strani imajo člani gospodarskega interesnega združenja koristi ne le od odprave zgornje meje zneska amortizacije, ki se lahko odšteje, ampak tudi od povečanja koeficienta degresivne amortizacije za eno točko ter, ob predpostavki načrtovanega prenosa sredstev uporabniku in ko so izpolnjeni nekateri pogoji, od oprostitve davka na kapitalske dobičke.