natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
This instruction was given in connection with the amendment of the Tax Administration Act as of 1 January 2004, in an effort to strengthen discipline in tax collection.
To navodilo je bilo dano v zvezi s spremembo Zakona o davčni službi s 1. januarja 2004, da bi se izboljšala disciplina pri pobiranju davkov.
In addition, the Commission notes that the tax office itself had appealed against this arrangement as early as 2 August 2004, i.e. not even one month after the arrangement was agreed upon.
Komisija poleg tega ugotavlja, da se je davčni urad sam pritožil proti temu dogovoru že 2. avgusta 2004, torej niti en mesec po sklenitvi dogovora.
The beneficiary submitted that the tax office had signalled its agreement to the arrangement even prior to the beneficiary launching the procedure.
Po trditvah upravičenca je davčni urad nakazal, da s strinja z dogovorom, še preden je upravičenec sprožil postopek.
The Commission considers that the evidence submitted by the beneficiary indicates quite the opposite.
Komisija meni, da dokazi, ki jih je predložil upravičenec, kažejo prav nasprotno.
In his letter of 3 February 2004 to the beneficiary, the director of the tax office writes that, although in principle he is not against the use of the arrangement procedure, he does not agree with the beneficiary's proposal for an arrangement featuring 35 % repayment of the debt.
Direktor davčnega urada v dopisu upravičencu z dne 3. februarja 2004 sporoča, da načeloma sicer ni proti uporabi postopka dogovora, se pa ne strinja s predlogom upravičenca glede dogovora, pri katerem bi bilo poplačanih 35 % dolga.
On the basis of this evidence, the Commission cannot but conclude that the Slovak authorities were opposed to the arrangement proposed by the beneficiary and were opposed to it before the launching of the arrangement procedure on 8 March 2004, before the creditors' vote on 9 July 2004 and also after the court approved the arrangement.
Komisija lahko na podlagi tega dokaza zgolj ugotovi, da so slovaški organi nasprotovali dogovoru, ki ga je predlagal upravičenec, in sicer so mu nasprotovali pred sprožitvijo postopka dogovora dne 8. marca 2004, pred glasovanjem upnikov dne 9. julija 2004, pa tudi potem ko je sodišče odobrilo dogovor.
The beneficiary submitted that long-term effects, such as the continuity of the tax revenue for the State, should be taken into account (see paragraph 46).
Upravičenec je trdil, da je treba upoštevati dolgoročne učinke, kot so neprekinjeni davčni prihodki za državo (glej odstavek 46).
First, it needs to be stressed that the market economy creditor test differs from the market economy investor test.
Najprej je treba poudariti, da se preizkus upnika v tržnem gospodarstvu pogoji razlikuje od preizkusa vlagatelja v tržnem gospodarstvu.
Whereas a market economy investor is in a position to decide whether to enter into a relationship with the company in question and will be driven by the long-term strategic prospect of obtaining an appropriate return from his investment, a ‘market economy creditor’, who is already in a commercial or public law relationship with the insolvent company, will aim to obtain the repayment of sums already due to him on conditions as advantageous as possible in terms of the degree of repayment and the time-frame.
Vlagatelj v tržnem gospodarstvu pogoji se lahko odloči, ali bo vzpostavil odnos z zadevno družbo, pri tem pa ga bodo vodile dolgoročne strateške možnosti glede ustreznega donosa njegove naložbe; „upnik v tržnem gospodarstvu“, ki je že v poslovnem odnosu ali javnopravnem razmerju z nesolvento družbo, pa si bo prizadeval povrniti zneske, ki mu jih ta že dolguje, pod čim bolj ugodnimi pogoji, kar zadeva obseg povračila in časovni okvir.
The motivations of the hypothetical market economy creditor and the market economy investor will therefore be different.
Motivi hipotetičnega upnika v tržnem gospodarstvu in vlagatelja v tržnem gospodarstvu se torej razlikujejo.
Accordingly, the case law has defined separate tests for the two situations.
Zato je sodna praksa opredelila različna preizkusa za oba položaja.
Second, as to the analogy with the creditor-supplier, it is important to note that the nature of his receivables and the nature of those of the State are fundamentally different.
Drugič, kar zadeva analogijo z upnikom-dobaviteljem, je treba opozoriti, da se narava njegovih terjatev in narava terjatev države bistveno razlikujeta.
Because the relations of the supplier to the insolvent firm have an exclusively contractual basis, he might genuinely suffer from the loss of a business partner.
Ker imajo odnosi med dobaviteljem in nesolventnim podjetjem izključno pogodbeno podlago, bi lahko dobavitelju izguba poslovnega partnerja resnično škodila.
If the insolvent company is liquidated or sold off, the supplier would need to find a new client or contract with the new owner.
Če se nesolventna družba likvidira ali razproda, bi si moral dobavitelj poiskati novo stranko ali skleniti pogodbo z novim lastnikom.
The risk is higher when his dependency on the insolvent firm is considerable.
Tveganje je večje, če je zelo odvisen od nesolventnega podjetja.
Such a creditor will indeed consider the future.
Tak upnik bo gotovo upošteval prihodnost.
In contrast, the relations of the State with the insolvent firm are based on public law and therefore are not dependent on the will of the parties.
Nasprotno pa razmerje med državo in nesolventnim podjetjem temelji na javnem pravu in torej ni odvisno od volje strank.
Any new owner taking over the assets of the liquidated firm would automatically be obliged to pay taxes.
Vsak nov lastnik, ki prevzame sredstva likvidiranega podjetja, bi moral samodejno plačevati davke.
Moreover, the State is never dependent on one taxpayer.
Poleg tega država nikoli ni odvisna samo od enega davkoplačevalca.
Finally and most importantly, the State is not profit-driven when levying taxes and does not act in a commercial manner or with commercial considerations when doing so.
Nazadnje in najpomembneje, države pri pobiranju davkov ne vodi dobiček in se pri tem ne vede in ne razmišlja tržno.
The above analogy is therefore not well founded.
Gornja analogija torej ni ustrezno utemeljena.
The Commission concludes that the situation of the State in the present case cannot be compared to the situation of a hypothetical market economy investor or to the situation of a hypothetical dependent market economy creditor.
Komisija ugotavlja, da se položaj države v tej zadevi ne more primerjati s položajem hipotetičnega vlagatelja v tržnem gospodarstvu ali s položajem hipotetičnega odvisnega upnika v tržnem gospodarstvu.
The loss of future taxes cannot therefore be taken into account when applying the market economy creditor principle.
Izguba prihodnjih davkov se pri uporabi načela upnika v tržnem gospodarstvu zato ne more upoštevati.
Finally, from the overview of taxes submitted by the beneficiary it is noted that a large majority of the taxes paid by the beneficiary since 1995 have been indirect taxes (excise duties and VAT).
Nazadnje je iz pregleda davkov, ki ga je predložil upravičenec, razvidno, da so bili davki, ki jih je upravičenec plačal od leta 1995, večinoma posredni davki (trošarine in DDV).
As these taxes are paid by final consumers, the liquidation of the beneficiary would have no impact on their collection as long as consumers continued to purchase the taxed products (in this case, mainly spirit and spirit-based beverages) from other producers.
Ker te davke plačujejo končni potrošniki, likvidacija upravičenca ne bi vplivala na njihovo pobiranje, vse dokler potrošniki kupujejo obdavčene proizvode (v tem primeru predvsem žgane pijače in pijače na osnovi žganih pijač) drugih proizvajalcev.
The beneficiary's argument regarding considerable future tax loss is therefore not credible.
Argument upravičenca v zvezi z veliko prihodnjo davčno izgubo zato ni verodostojen.
On the basis of the above evidence, the Commission concludes that in the present case the market economy creditor test was not met and that the State conferred on the beneficiary an advantage that it would not have been able to obtain from the market.
Glede na zgoraj navedene dokaze Komisija ugotavlja, da v tej zadevi preizkus upnika v tržnem gospodarstvu ni bil uspešno opravljen in da je država upravičencu dala prednost, ki je na trgu ne bi mogel dobiti.
The Commission therefore concludes that the disputed measure constitutes state aid within the meaning of Article 87(1) of the EC Treaty.
Zato Komisija ugotavlja, da je sporni ukrep državna pomoč v smislu člena 87(1) Pogodbe ES.
The state aid granted to the beneficiary is equal to the amount of debt written off by the tax office in the arrangement procedure, viz. SKK 416515990.
Državna pomoč, odobrena upravičencu, je enaka znesku dolga, ki ga je davčni urad odpisal v postopku dogovora, in sicer 416515990 SKK.
Compatibility of aid: Derogation under Article 87(3) of the EC Treaty
Združljivost pomoči: odstopanje v skladu s členom 87(3) Pogodbe ES
The primary objective of the measure is to assist a company in difficulty.
Glavni cilj ukrepa je pomagati družbi v težavah.
In such cases, it is possible to apply the exemption of Article 87(3)(c) of the EC Treaty, which allows state aid that facilitates the development of certain economic activities where such aid does not adversely affect trading conditions to an extent contrary to the common interest and where the relevant conditions are met.
V takih primerih se lahko uporabi izjema iz člena 87(3)(c) Pogodbe ES, ki dovoljuje državno pomoč za olajševanje razvoja določenih gospodarskih dejavnosti, kadar takšna pomoč ne škoduje trgovinskim pogojem v obsegu, ki bi bil v nasprotju s skupnimi interesi, in kadar se izpolnijo ustrezni pogoji.
In view of the beneficiary's production portfolio, the Commission assessed whether the special rules applicable to agriculture apply in the present case.
Glede na portfelj proizvodnje upravičenca je Komisija ocenila, ali v zadevnem primeru veljajo posebna pravila, ki se uporabljajo za kmetijstvo.
Basing itself on the information on the beneficiary's turnover submitted by the Slovak authorities, the Commission in its decision to open the formal investigation arrived at the conclusion that most of beneficiary's products are not products falling under Annex I to the EC Treaty and that, therefore, the general state aid rules apply.
Na podlagi informacij o prometu upravičenca, ki so jih predložili slovaški organi, je Komisija v odločitvi o sprožitvi formalne preiskave prišla do zaključka, da večina proizvodov upravičenca ne sodi v Prilogo I k Pogodbi ES in da se torej uporabljajo splošna pravila o državni pomoči.
In its comments on the decision to open the formal investigation, the beneficiary disputed the turnover data previously provided by the Slovak authorities (see Table 1) but not the Commission's decision to base its assessment on the general state aid rules.
Upravičenec je v svojih pripombah na odločitev o sprožitvi formalnega postopka preiskave izpodbijal podatke o prometu, ki so jih pred tem predložili slovaški organi (glej preglednico 1), ni pa izpodbijal odločitve Komisije, da svojo oceno utemelji na splošnih pravilih o državni pomoči.
Without wishing to determine whether the figures provided by the beneficiary are accurate, the Commission verified whether its above conclusion would hold up against the new data.
Komisije ni imela namena ugotavljati, ali so podatki, ki jih je predložil upravičenec, pravilni, je pa preverila, ali bi njena zgoraj navedena ugotovitev veljala tudi ob upoštevanju novih podatkov.
It concludes that most of the beneficiary's turnover is generated by products not falling under Annex I to the EC Treaty.
Komisija ugotavlja, da upravičenec večino svojega prometa ustvari s proizvodi, ki ne sodijo v Prilogo I k Pogodbi ES.
The general, and not the sector-specific, state aid rules thus apply.
Uporabljajo se torej splošna pravila o državni pomoči in ne pravila, ki veljajo za določen sektor.
Rescue and restructuring aid to ailing companies is currently governed by the Community guidelines on state aid for rescuing and restructuring firms in difficulty (‘new guidelines’), which replaced the previous text adopted in 1999 (‘1999 guidelines’).
Pomoč za reševanje in prestrukturiranje družb v težavah trenutno urejajo smernice Skupnosti o državni pomoči za reševanje in prestrukturiranje podjetij v težavah („nove smernice“), ki so nadomestile prejšnje besedilo, sprejeto leta 1999 („smernice iz leta 1999“).
The transitional provisions of the new guidelines stipulate that they will apply for the assessment of any rescue or restructuring aid granted without the authorisation of the Commission (unlawful aid) if some or all of the aid is granted after 1 October 2004, the date of publication of the new guidelines in the Official Journal of the European Union (point 104).
Prehodne določbe novih smernic določajo, da se smernice uporabljajo pri ocenjevanju vseh pomoči za reševanje in prestrukturiranje, odobrenih brez dovoljenja Komisije (nezakonita pomoč), če je bil del ali celoten obseg pomoči odobren po 1. oktobru 2004, kar je datum objave novih smernic v Uradnem listu Evropske unije (točke 104).
Should, however, the aid be unlawfully granted before 1 October 2004, the examination is to be conducted on the basis of the guidelines applicable at the time the aid was granted (point 104).
Če pa je bila pomoč nezakonito odobrena pred 1. oktobrom 2004, je treba pregled opraviti na podlagi smernic, ki so veljale, ko je bila pomoč odobrena (točke 104).
The Commission notes that the tax office's approval of the arrangement was issued on 9 July 2004 and took effect as of 23 July 2004.
Komisija ugotavlja, da je davčni urad dogovor odobril 9. julija 2004, veljati pa je začel 23. julija 2004.
This means that the aid was unlawfully granted before 1 October 2004.
To pomeni, da je bila pomoč nezakonito odobrena pred 1. oktobrom 2004.
The 1999 guidelines, which were applicable at the time the aid was granted, therefore apply.
Zaradi tega veljajo za to pomoč smernice iz leta 1999, ki so se uporabljale, ko je bila odobrena.
The Commission concludes that the beneficiary is a medium-sized company within the meaning of Commission Regulation (EC) No 70/2001 on the application of Articles 87 and 88 of the EC Treaty to state aid to small and medium-sized enterprises.
Komisija ugotavlja, da je upravičenec srednje velika družba v smislu Uredbe Komisije (ES) št. 70/2001 o uporabi členov 87 in 88 Pogodbe ES pri pomoči za majhna in srednje velika podjetja.
Eligibility of the firm
Upravičenost podjetja do pomoči
According to point 5(c) of the 1999 guidelines, a firm is regarded as being in difficulty where it fulfils the criteria under domestic law for being the subject of collective insolvency proceedings.
V skladu s točko 5(c) smernic iz leta 1999 za podjetje velja, da je v težavah, kadar v skladu z nacionalno zakonodajo izpolnjuje merila, po katerih je predmet postopkov za primer kolektivne plačilne nesposobnosti.
The beneficiary was party to the arrangement procedure, which is applicable to insolvent companies as defined in the Bankruptcy Act.
Upravičenec je bil stranka v postopku dogovora, ki se uporablja za plačilno nesposobne družbe, kakor je določeno v Zakonu o stečaju.
It is therefore eligible for rescue and restructuring aid.
Zaradi tega je upravičen do pomoči za reševanje in prestrukturiranje.
The disputed measure was initially described by the Slovak authorities as rescue aid.
Slovaški organi so sporni ukrep najprej opisali kot pomoč za reševanje.
Pursuant to the 1999 guidelines, the Commission raised doubts as to the compatibility of the aid as rescue aid on the grounds described in Part III above.
Skladno s smernicami iz leta 1999 je Komisija izrazila pomisleke o združljivosti te pomoči kot pomoči za reševanje na podlagi razlogov, navedenih v delu III.
Neither the Slovak authorities nor the beneficiary commented on these doubts.
Slovaški organi in upravičenec niso imeli pripomb na te pomisleke.
No new facts have been presented to the Commission in this respect.
V zvezi s tem Komisiji niso bila predložena nobena nova dejstva.
Since the above doubts have not been allayed, the Commission concludes that the aid is not compatible as rescue aid within the meaning of the 1999 guidelines.
Ker ti pomisleki niso bili odpravljeni, Komisija ugotavlja, da ta pomoč ni združljiva kot pomoč za reševanje v smislu smernic iz leta 1999.
The Commission raised doubts as to whether the aid was compatible as restructuring aid within the meaning of the 1999 guidelines on the grounds described in Part III above.
Komisija je izrazila pomisleke o združljivosti te pomoči kot pomoči za prestrukturiranje v smislu smernic iz leta 1999 na podlagi razlogov, navedenih v delu III.
The Commission notes that the Slovak authorities, with whom lies the burden of proof to show that the state aid is compatible with the common market, have not submitted any new facts in support of this conclusion.
Komisija ugotavlja, da slovaški organi, ki nosijo dokazno breme glede združljivosti državne pomoči s skupnim trgom, niso predložili nobenih novih dejstev v podporo tej ugotovitvi.
It took due note of the comments submitted by the beneficiary.
Komisija je ustrezno upoštevala pripombe, ki jih je predložil upravičenec.
Return to long-term viability
Vrnitev dolgoročne sposobnosti preživetja
According to the 1999 guidelines, the granting of restructuring aid must be linked to and conditional on implementation of a feasible and coherent restructuring plan to restore the firm's long-term viability.
V skladu s smernicami iz leta 1999 mora biti odobritev pomoči za prestrukturiranje povezana in pogojena z izvajanjem izvedljivega in celovitega načrta za prestrukturiranje, po katerem bi podjetje spet postalo dolgoročno sposobno preživetja.
The Member State commits itself to the plan, which must be endorsed by the Commission.
Država članica se zaveže načrtu, ki ga mora odobriti Komisija.
Failure by the company to implement the plan is regarded as misuse of aid.
Če podjetje ne izvaja načrta, se to obravnava kot zloraba pomoči.
The restructuring plan must be such as to enable the beneficiary to restore its long-term viability within a reasonable timescale and on the basis of realistic assumptions as to the future operating conditions.
Načrt za prestrukturiranje mora biti tak, da lahko upravičenec v primernem časovnem okviru znova doseže dolgoročno sposobnost preživetja na podlagi realnih predvidevanj glede pogojev delovanja v prihodnosti.
The plan should describe the circumstances that led to the beneficiary's difficulties and identify appropriate measures to address these difficulties.
V načrtu morajo biti opisane okoliščine, ki so povzročile težave upravičenca, in opredeljeni ustrezni ukrepi za reševanje teh težav.
Restructuring operations cannot be limited to financial aid designed to make good debts and past losses without tackling the reasons for difficulties.
Dejavnosti na področju prestrukturiranja ne smejo biti omejene na finančno pomoč, namenjeno povračilu dolgov in izgub v preteklosti, ne da se odpravljajo tudi razlogi za težave.
For companies situated in assisted areas and for small and medium-sized companies, the 1999 guidelines stipulate that the conditions for authorising aid may be less stringent as regards the implementation of compensatory measures and the content of monitoring reports.
Za družbe z območij, kjer prejemajo pomoč mala in srednja podjetja, smernice iz leta 1999 določajo, da so lahko zanje pogoji za odobritev pomoči manj strogi, kar zadeva izvajanje kompenzacijskih ukrepov in vsebino poročil o spremljanju.
Nonetheless, these factors do not exempt such companies from the requirement to draw up a restructuring plan or the Member States from the obligation to make the granting of the restructuring aid conditional upon implementation of a restructuring plan.
Vendar pa ti dejavniki ne izvzamejo teh družb iz obveznosti, da morajo pripraviti načrt za prestrukturiranje, držav članic pa ne iz obveznosti, da morajo odobritev pomoči za prestrukturiranje pogojevati z izvajanjem načrta za prestrukturiranje.
After the opening of the formal investigation, the Slovak authorities confirmed that the business plan that the beneficiary was obliged to produce as a condition for the launching of the arrangement procedure was considered only by the competent court, i.e. not by the granting authority, and that neither the court nor the tax office monitored the implementation of the plan.
Po sprožitvi formalnega postopka preiskave so slovaški organi potrdili, da je poslovni načrt, ki ga je moral upravičenec pripraviti in je bil pogoj za pričetek postopka dogovora, preučilo samo pristojno sodišče, ne pa organ, ki je pomoč odobril, ter da sodišče in davčni urad nista spremljala izvajanja načrta.
Contrary to this confirmation, the beneficiary submitted that the tax office had studied the ability of the business plan to restore long-term viability prior to its approval of the arrangement, but it did not produce any evidence to support this claim.
V nasprotju s to potrditvijo je upravičenec trdil, da je davčni urad pred odobritvijo dogovora proučil zmožnost poslovnega načrta za ponovno vzpostavitev dolgoročne sposobnosti preživetja, vendar ni predložil nobenih dokazov, ki bi podprli to trditev.
The beneficiary further argued that the absence of a formal restructuring plan is irrelevant in the case of ex post assessment of aid by the Commission, as the Commission is then in a position to assess whether the beneficiary actually became viable.
Upravičenec je trdil tudi, da je dejstvo, da ni bilo formalnega načrta za prestrukturiranje, nepomembno, kadar Komisija ocenjuje pomoč naknadno, saj lahko zdaj presodi, ali je upravičenec dejansko postal sposoben preživetja.
According to the beneficiary, a formal restructuring plan can be required only in the case of ex ante assessment, the only sort of assessment to which the 1999 guidelines apply.
Po mnenju upravičenca se lahko formalni načrt za prestrukturiranje zahteva samo pri predhodnem ocenjevanju, kar je edina vrsta ocenjevanja, za katero se uporabljajo smernice iz leta 1999.
This line of argument is not correct.
Ta argument ni pravilen.
The 1999 guidelines apply to the compatibility assessment of both notified and unlawful aid.
Smernice iz leta 1999 se uporabljajo za ocenjevanje združljivosti priglašene pomoči, pa tudi nezakonite pomoči.
Whenever the assessment takes place, the condition that the restructuring aid be subject to the establishment of a viable restructuring plan is valid.
Ne glede na to, kdaj se opravlja ocenjevanje, velja pogoj, da je pomoč za prestrukturiranje odvisna od priprave načrta za prestrukturiranje, ki bi omogočal preživetje.
The Commission has to conduct its assessment on the basis of the information available at the time the aid was granted.
Komisija mora oceno opraviti na podlagi informacij, ki so bile na voljo takrat, ko je bila pomoč odobrena.
It may be concluded that the tax office as the granting authority did not have any opportunity to evaluate a restructuring plan and to make the writing-off of its receivables subject to implementation of a restructuring plan that would be duly monitored.
Lahko se ugotovi, da davčni urad kot organ, ki je pomoč odobril, ni imel nobene priložnosti, da bi ovrednotil načrt prestrukturiranja in da bi odpis terjatev pogojil z izvajanjem načrta prestrukturiranja, ki bi bil ustrezno spremljan.
It follows that the first formal condition, which is fully applicable also to ex post assessment, was not met.
Torej ni bil izpolnjen prvi formalni pogoj, ki se v celoti uporablja tudi za naknadno ocenjevanje.
As to the substance of the business plan, the Slovak authorities have not submitted any information that would allay the Commission's doubt as to whether the plan represents a genuine restructuring plan as required by the 1999 guidelines.
V zvezi z vsebino poslovnega načrta slovaški organi niso predložili nobenih informacij, ki bi odpravile pomisleke Komisije glede tega, ali gre za dejanski načrt za prestrukturiranje, kakor ga zahtevajo smernice iz leta 1999.
The Commission cannot but stand by the conclusion it gave in the decision to open the formal investigation.
Komisija lahko le potrdi svojo ugotovitev iz odločitve o sprožitvi formalne preiskave.