natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Since the legitimate expectation was infringed once Decision 2003/757/EC had been notified, the Commission takes the view that deferment of the start of the transitional period is not justified, not even until the date of publication of that Decision in the Official Journal.
Zaradi prekinitve upravičenega pričakovanja od dneva vročitve Odločbe 2003/757/ES Komisija ocenjuje, da preložitev začetka prehodnega obdobja na poznejši datum ali datum objave navedene odločbe v Uradnem listu ni utemeljena.
Forum 187, the association representing and acting on behalf of the coordination centres and, as it has itself stated, recognised as such by Belgium, lodged a detailed appeal before the Court at the end of April 2003 against 2003/757/EC, i.e. prior to publication of the Decision in the Official Journal. This shows that, through the association charged with defending their interests, the coordination centres were aware of the content of that Decision, and in particular the description of the aid as being incompatible with the common market and the requirement that Belgium amend or terminate the scheme in question.
Forum 187, združenje, ki zastopa centre za usklajevanje in deluje v njihovem imenu ter ki ga je kot takega po lastnih izjavah priznala Belgija, je na Sodišče konec aprila 2003 dejansko vložil obrazloženo tožbo zoper Odločbo 2003/757/ES – torej pred objavo odločbe v Uradnem listu – kar dokazuje, da so bili centri za usklajevanje prek zastopništva združenja, pooblaščenega za njihovo obrambo, obveščeni o vsebini navedene odločbe in zlasti ugotovitvi, da gre za pomoč, nezdružljivo s skupnim trgom, ter obveznosti Belgije, da spremeni ali ukine zadevno shemo.
Lastly, the Commission notes that no coordination centre has, in practice, suffered from the prohibition on renewing the authorisations and that, pursuant to either Decision 2003/757/EC or the order of 26 June 2003, all have been able since 18 February 2003 to benefit from a transitional period enabling them to adapt to the change of scheme imposed by the Commission.
Komisija nazadnje ugotavlja, da so v praksi lahko vsi centri za usklajevanje obnovili potrditve ter na podlagi Odločbe 2003/757/ES ali sklepa z dne 26. junija 2003 od 18. februarja 2003 vsi imeli koristi prehodnega obdobja, ki jim omogoča prilagoditev spremembi sheme, ki jo je zahtevala Komisija.
The order of 26 June 2003 also refers explicitly to the date on which Decision 2003/757/EC was notified by suspending the effects of the decision ‘insofar as it prohibited the Kingdom of Belgium from renewing coordination centre authorisations effective as at the date of notification of the decision’ (underlining added).
Sklep z dne 26. junija 2003 se tudi izrecno sklicuje na dan vročitve Odločbe 2003/757/ES, ki začasno odpravlja učinke odločbe, „ker ta [odločba] Kraljevini Belgiji, na dan vročitve navedene odločbe prepoveduje obnovitev obstoječe potrditve centrov za usklajevanje“ (podčrtano je dodano).
This suspension thus paved the way for renewal of the authorisations in force on 17 February 2003 and for extension of the effects of the scheme until 22 June 2006 at the latest, the date of the judgment as to substance.
Ta odložitev je torej omogočila obnovitev potrditev, ki se 17. februarja 2003 še niso iztekle, in podaljšanje učinkov sheme do najpozneje 22. junija 2006, tj. datuma sodbe o vsebini zadeve.
On 16 July 2003 the Commission also confirmed that it would not be seeking repayment of the aid granted on the basis of the order of 26 June 2003, thereby assuring the coordination centres of effective and definitive enjoyment of the transitional period resulting from the effects of the suspension.
Poleg tega je Komisija potrdila, da od 16. julija 2003 ne bo več zahtevala povračila pomoči, dodeljene na podlagi sklepa z dne 26. junija 2003, ter tako centrom za usklajevanje zagotovila dejansko in dokončno uporabo prehodnega obdobja, ki je posledica sprejete odložitve.
The Commission also takes the view that it cannot accept the arguments put forward by Belgium and the coordination centres in support of their request for deferral of the starting date of the appropriate transitional period.
Poleg tega Komisija meni, da ne more sprejeti argumentov, ki so jih izpostavili Belgija in centri za usklajevanje ter na podlagi katerih so zahtevali preložitev začetka ustreznega prehodnega obdobja na poznejši datum.
This is because the Court confirmed the description of the aid as being incompatible with the common market on 17 February 2003.
Sodišče je dejansko potrdilo ugotovitev obstoja pomoči, ki je nezdružljiva s skupnim trgom, 17. februarja 2003.
The legitimate expectation raised by the Commission decisions of 1984 and 1987 authorising the scheme was thus infringed in February 2003 at the latest.
Upravičeno pričakovanje, ki izhaja iz odločb Komisije iz let 1984 in 1987 o odobritvi sheme, se je torej končalo najpozneje februarja 2003.
If the date of the Court judgment and its content were not known to the coordination centres, this uncertainty did not stem from any actions on the part of the Commission.
Če datuma sodbe Sodišča in njene vsebine centri za usklajevanje niso poznali, ta negotovost ni posledica dejanj Komisije.
The judicial procedure was thus not likely to give rise to a legitimate expectation — enforceable against the Commission — that the coordination centre scheme was compatible with the common market.
Sodni postopek ni mogel ustvariti upravičenega pričakovanja v nasprotju s Komisijo, po mnenju katere bi bila shema centrov za usklajevanje združljiva s skupnim trgom.
The uncertainty stems from the introduction of appeals which, as such, do not have suspensive effect.
Izhaja iz vložitve tožb, ki jih v tej obliki ni mogoče odložiti.
The duration of the judicial procedure cannot, therefore, justify extension of the transitional period, which had, in practice, been granted to the coordination centres with effect from 18 February 2003, by deferring the starting date of the transitional period to that date.
Trajanje sodnega postopka torej ne more upravičiti podaljšanja prehodnega obdobja, dejansko odobrenega za centre za usklajevanje od 18. februarja 2003, pri čemer bi se premaknil datum začetka prehodnega obdobja.
Date of the end of the appropriate transitional period
Končni datum ustreznega prehodnega obdobja
In determining the content of the appropriate transitional measures and the exact duration of the appropriate transitional period, the Commission has based itself on the information that is available from the commitments entered into and from the requests and statements made by Belgium or the undertakings concerned before or shortly after adoption of Decision 2003/757/EC.
Za določitev vsebine ustreznih prehodnih ukrepov in natančnega trajanja ustreznega prehodnega obdobja je Komisija uporabila razpoložljive informacije, ki izhajajo iz sprejetih obveznosti, oblikovanih zahtevkov in izjav Belgije ali zadevnih podjetij pred sprejetjem Odločbe 2003/757/ES ali kmalu po njem.
In its opinion, this information provides the best illustration not only of Belgium's position but also of the position of the undertakings concerned as at 17 February 2003.
Komisija dejansko ocenjuje, da te informacije najbolje ponazarjajo ne le stališče Belgije, ampak tudi stališče zadevnih podjetij 17. februarja 2003.
The absence of any reaction to some of the formal — and challengeable — acts of the national authorities or to Decision 2003/531/EC has also been interpreted as a sign of acceptance on the part of the undertakings concerned.
Slab odziv na nekatere uradne in izpodbojne akte nacionalnih organov ali na Odločbo 2003/531/ES se je obravnaval kot znak strinjanja zadevnih podjetij.
First, Belgium had, within the code of conduct monitoring group, committed itself to abolishing the effects of the coordination centre scheme by 31 December 2005 at the latest.
Prvič, Belgija se je na podlagi dela skupine za spremljanje izvajanja kodeksa ravnanja zavezala k odpravi učinkov sheme centrov za usklajevanje najpozneje do 31. decembra 2005.
This undertaking was given in the Council conclusions of 26 and 27 November 2000 [21].
Ta zaveza je vključena v sklepe Sveta z dne 26. in 27. novembra 2000 [21].
In a letter of 6 March 2003 addressed to the Commission and mentioning the Council conclusions and the statement by the Finance Minister, Belgium commented as follows: ‘Under these conditions, Belgium has entered into commitments towards its coordination centres the effects of which will come to an end on 31 December 2005’.
Belgija v dopisu z dne 6. marca 2003, naslovljenem na Komisijo, ki navaja sklepe Sveta in sporočilo ministra za finance, ugotavlja, da „je Belgija v teh okoliščinah sprejela obveznosti v zvezi s svojimi centri za usklajevanje, katerih učinki se končajo 31. decembra 2005“.
It also developed this argument before the Court (paragraphs 141 and 142 of the judgment).
Belgija je ta argument uporabila tudi pred Sodiščem (točki 141 in 142 sodbe).
Although it was not viewed by the Court as justification for a legitimate expectation vis-à-vis the Commission, the political commitment entered into by Belgium towards its coordination centres seems, by contrast, to be relevant for assessing the transitional period that Belgium deemed appropriate for them.
Čeprav Sodišče politične zavezanosti Belgije do svojih centrov za usklajevanje ni obravnavalo kot temelj za upravičeno pričakovanje v zvezi s Komisijo, se zdi, da je ta zavezanost primerna za oceno prehodnega obdobja, ki je v skladu z oceno Komisije ustrezno za centre.
Second, in the letter of 6 March 2003, Belgium reacted as follows to the reasonable length of time as defined by the Commission in Decision 2003/757/EC: ‘The Commission has rightly granted a reasonable length of time to the coordination centres.
Drugič, v istem dopisu z dne 6. marca 2003 se je Belgija v zvezi s tem odzvala na razumno odložitev, kot jo je določila Komisija v Odločbi 2003/757/ES: „Komisija je centrom za usklajevanje odobrila razumen rok.
The decision to allow the authorisation period in force to run its course is justified, except for the coordination centres with an authorisation that expires in the months following the Commission decision and, more particularly, before the end of 2005 since these centres will not have time to adapt to the early termination of the scheme for coordination centres. In this instance, the reasonable length of time is insufficient.’
Odločitev, da se omogoči uporaba celotnega trajanja potrditve, ki se še ni iztekla, je utemeljena, razen za centre za usklajevanje, katerih veljavna potrditev se izteče v mesecih po odločbi Komisije in zlasti pred koncem leta 2005, ker ti centri ne bodo imeli časa za prilagoditev prezgodnjemu zaključku sheme centrov za usklajevanje.
Third, on 20 March and 26 May 2003 Belgium notified the Commission of its ‘intention to maintain the coordination centre scheme for coordination centres that existed on 31 December 2000 and had an authorisation expiring between 17 February 2003 and 31 December 2005 until the latter date’.
Tretjič, Belgija je 20. marca in 26. maja 2003 obvestila Komisijo o svoji „nameri za ohranitev sheme centrov za usklajevanje v korist centrov za usklajevanje, ki so obstajali 31. decembra 2000 ter katerih potrditev se izteče med 17. februarjem 2003 in 31. decembrom 2005 do tega zadnjega datuma“.
It also asked the Council to adopt on the basis of the third subparagraph of Article 88(2) of the Treaty a decision authorising that extension.
Belgija je prav tako zahtevala, da Svet na podlagi tretjega pododstavka člena 88(2) Pogodbe ES sprejme odločbo, ki to podaljšanje dovoljuje.
That decision, Decision 2003/531/EC, was adopted by the Council on 16 July 2003.
Odločbo 2003/531/ES je Svet sprejel 16. julija 2003.
It stipulates in recital 10: ‘The new aid planned is temporary.
V uvodni izjavi (10) določa: „Nova načrtovana pomoč je začasna.
It is intended to […] by enabling the beneficiaries to continue operating in Belgium, at least for the period necessary to enable Belgium to introduce other measures for coordination centres established on its territory or to facilitate reorganisation of the investments of the multinational groups in question, avoiding abrupt termination of contracts.’
Upravičencem bo omogočila nadaljevanje dejavnosti v Belgiji vsaj za obdobje, ki ga ta država potrebuje za vzpostavitev drugih ukrepov za centre za usklajevanje s sedežem na njenem ozemlju ali spodbujanje reorganizacije naložb zadevnih mednarodnih skupin, pri čemer se preprečujejo nenadne prekinitve pogodb“.
A number of press articles reported the request made by Belgium and Decision 2003/531/EC.
Zahteva Belgije in Odločba 2003/531/ES sta bili obravnavani v več časopisnih člankih.
The Commission reacted to that Decision in a press release on 16 July 2003.
Komisija se je na navedeno odločbo odzvala s sporočilom za javnost z dne 16. julija 2003.
Neither Forum 187 nor any of the coordination centres concerned challenged the said decision or contested the restriction of the extension to 31 December 2005.
Niti Forum 187 niti nobeden od zadevnih centrov za usklajevanje ni izpodbijal navedene odločbe ali ugovarjal omejitvi podaljšanja na 31. december 2005.
Fourth, the Court resumed the request by Forum 187 in the following terms: ‘Forum 187, which seeks the annulment of the decision insofar as it does not lay down appropriate transitional measures for the centres with an authorisation which expires between 17 February 2003 and 31 December 2004’ and ‘the coordination centres with an authorisation that expired during 2003 and 2004 needed a transitional period of two years in which to reorganise themselves or, if appropriate, to leave Belgium’ [24].
Četrtič, Sodišče povzema zahtevo Foruma 187, kot sledi: „Forum 187 zahteva razveljavitev odločbe Komisije, ker ne predvideva ustreznih prehodnih ukrepov za centre, katerih potrditev se izteče med 17. februarjem 2003 in 31. decembrom 2004“ ter „centri, katerih potrditev se je iztekla v letih 2003 in 2004, so potrebovali dveletno prehodno obdobje za reorganizacijo ali po potrebi zapustitev Belgije“ [24].
The Commission notes that 34 months elapsed between 17 February 2003 and 31 December 2005.
Komisija ugotavlja, da je med 17. februarjem 2003 in 31. decembrom 2005 poteklo 34 mesecev.
Fifth, as authorised by the order of 26 June 2003, Belgium renewed the coordination centre authorisations that expired between 17 February 2003 and 31 December 2005.
Petič, kot določa sklep z dne 26. junija 2003, je Belgija obnovila potrditve centrov za usklajevanje, ki so se iztekle med 17. februarjem 2003 in 31. decembrom 2005.
With the exception of four coordination centres, these authorisation were all renewed for a period ending on 31 December 2005.
Razen za štiri centre za usklajevanje so bile vse potrditve obnovljene za obdobje do 31. decembra 2005.
Neither Belgium nor the undertakings concerned reported any appeals against this explicit restriction of the duration of the authorisations.
Niti Belgija niti zadevna podjetja se niso pritožili zaradi te izrecne omejitve trajanja potrditev.
Similarly, it would seem that none of the undertakings concerned submitted — either before 31 December 2005 or even before 22 June 2006 — any request for a further extension.
Prav tako se zdi, da nobeno zadevno podjetje ni niti pred 31. decembrom 2005 niti pred 22. junijem 2006 vložilo prošnje za podaljšanje potrditve za novo obdobje.
Sixth, since appropriate transitional measures were needed to allow Belgium to adapt its legislation and the coordination centres to adapt to a new tax regime, the following points should be noted:
Šestič, v zvezi s potrebo po ustreznih prehodnih ukrepih, ki bi Belgiji omogočili prilagoditev zakonodaje, centrom za usklajevanje pa prilagoditev novi davčni shemi, je koristno navesti naslednje:
the Royal Decree of 16 May 2003 amending, as regards withholding tax, the Royal Decree implementing the Income Tax Code coordinated in 1992 (AR/CIR92) provides for exemption from withholding tax in respect of interest paid by intra-group banks (including coordination centres).
kraljeva uredba z dne 16. maja 2003, ki v zvezi s pri viru odtegnjenim davkom spreminja kraljevo uredbo o izvajanju Zakonika o davkih na prihodek, usklajenega leta 1992 (AR/CIR92), predvideva oprostitev pri viru odtegnjenega davka na obresti, ki so jih plačale banke znotraj skupin (med katerimi so centri za usklajevanje).
It entered into force on 5 June 2003.
Veljati je začela 5. junija 2003.
On 23 April 2003 the Commission approved the advance tax ruling scheme implemented by Belgium on 1 January 2003 [25], which also applied to coordination centres.
Komisija je 23. aprila 2003 odobrila sistem odločanja, ki ga je vzpostavila Belgija 1. januarja 2003 [25], ki se uporablja tudi za centre za usklajevanje.
It also approved part of the new scheme for coordination centres notified in May 2002.
Odobrila je tudi del nove sheme centrov za usklajevanje, ki je bila priglašena maja 2002.
In Decision 2005/378/EC of 8 September 2004 concerning the aid scheme which Belgium is proposing to implement for coordination centres [26], the Commission took the view that the new scheme as amended by Belgium in line with its commitment to do so did not constitute State aid.The Law of 22 June 2005 introducing a tax deduction for risk capital [27] provides for a scheme of notional interest deductions that entered into force on 1 January 2006.
Z odločbo Komisije 2005/378/ES z dne 8. septembra 2004 o shemi pomoči, ki jo bo Belgija namenila centrom za usklajevanje [26], je bilo ugotovljeno, da nova shema, ki si jo je Belgija prizadevala spremeniti, ne pomeni državne pomoči.Zakon z dne 22. junija 2005, ki vzpostavlja davčno olajšavo za tvegani kapital [27], določa shemo odtegljaja od nominalnih obresti, veljati pa je začel 1. januarja 2006.
Although not limited to the coordination centres, this scheme was developed with the explicit objective in mind of offering an attractive alternative to the coordination centre scheme, and in particular for those centres with an authorisation terminating on 31 December 2005.
Čeprav shema ne velja le za centre za usklajevanje, je bila oblikovana z jasnim ciljem, da omogoči privlačno nadomestno možnost za shemo centrov za usklajevanje, zlasti za centre, katerih potrditev se je iztekla 31. decembra 2005.
This measure was announced at the end of 2004 and was presented at the beginning of 2005 to the representatives of the coordination centres, who seemed to have welcomed it [28].
Ta ukrep je bil objavljen konec leta 2004, od začetka leta 2005 pa je bil predstavljen predstavnikom centrov za usklajevanje, ki so ga, kot kaže, dobro sprejeli [28].
The measure also received broad press coverage.The Law of 22 June 2005 also provides for the — general — abolition of the 0,5 % registration duty on capital transfers with effect from 1 January 2006.
Ta ukrep je bil tudi zelo široko predstavljen v medijih.Zakon z dne 22. junija 2005 določa tudi splošno ukinitev vpisnine na kapitalske vložke v višini 0,5 %, ki velja od 1. januarja 2006.
Consequently, on 1 January 2006 at the latest, the undertakings concerned that had decided to stay in Belgium could opt for a replacement scheme that was simple (since it did not involve any major reorganisation [29]) and attractive.
Zato so zadevna podjetja, ki so se odločila, da bodo ostala v Belgiji, najpozneje do 1. januarja 2006 imela na voljo nadomestno shemo, ki je bila preprosta, ker ni pomenila večjega preoblikovanja [29], in zanimiva.
On this basis too, the date of 31 December 2005 thus seems to be a reasonable date for the expiry of the appropriate transitional period demanded by the Court in so far as it allows all the coordination centres to move seamlessly from one scheme to another.
Na tej podlagi se prav tako zdi, da je 31. december 2005 razumen datum za zaključek ustreznega prehodnega obdobja, ki ga je zahtevalo Sodišče, ker omogoča vsem centrom za usklajevanje, da brez težav preidejo z ene sheme na drugo.
The Commission also notes that 70 of the 243 coordination centres present in 2002 have ceased operations in Belgium.
Komisija med drugim ugotavlja, da je 70 od 243 centrov za usklajevanje, ki so delovali leta 2002, dejansko prenehalo z izvajanjem dejavnosti v Belgiji.
Situation of coordination centres with an authorisation that was extended between 17 February 2003 and 31 December 2005
Položaj centrov za usklajevanje, katerih potrditev je bila podaljšana med 17. februarjem 2003 in 31. decembrom 2005
For the reasons given above, the Commission considers that the appropriate transitional period sought by the Court should have run from 18 February 2003 to 31 December 2005.
Komisija na podlagi navedenih razlogov meni, da bi se moralo ustrezno prehodno obdobje, ki ga je zahtevalo Sodišče, podaljšati z 18. februarja 2003 na 31. december 2005.
For most of the coordination centres with a renewed authorisation based on the order of 26 June 2003, the renewal period was restricted by Belgium to 31 December 2005, in line therefore with the appropriate transitional period defined in Sections 2 and 3.
Belgija je pri večini centrov za usklajevanje, katerih potrditev je bila obnovljena na podlagi sklepa z dne 26. junija 2003, omejila trajanje podaljšanega obdobja do 31. decembra 2005, kar je torej v skladu z ustreznim prehodnim obdobjem iz oddelkov 2 in 3.
However, as regards the four coordination centres with a renewed authorisation based on the order of 26 June 2003, the authorisation was renewed by Belgium for an indefinite period.
Vendar je Belgija potrditve štirih centrov za usklajevanje, ki so bile obnovljene na podlagi sklepa z dne 26. junija 2003, obnovila za nedoločen čas.
The Commission notes that the order of 26 June 2003 explicitly restricts the effects of such renewals to the date of the judgment as to substance.
Vseeno Komisija ugotavlja, da so se s sklepom z dne 26. junija 2003 jasno omejili učinki takšnih obnovitev do datuma izdaje sodbe o vsebini zadeve.
Consequently, provided that the coordination centres concerned had not opted out of the coordination centre scheme in favour of the notional interest scheme for income in 2006, these authorisations were covered by the said order until 22 June 2006.
Zato je torej za potrditve zadevnih centrov za usklajevanje, ki niso opustili sheme centrov za usklajevanje in se odločili za uporabo sheme nominalnih obresti na dohodek iz leta 2006, navedeni sklep veljal do 22. junija 2006.
While the Commission is of the opinion that the appropriate transitional period ended on 31 December 2005, it does acknowledge that its press release of 16 July 2003 could have given rise among the coordination centres concerned to the legitimate expectation that there would be no request for repayment of the aid from which they benefited up to the date of the Court judgment as to substance.
Čeprav Komisija meni, da se je ustrezno prehodno obdobje končalo 31. decembra 2005, vseeno priznava, da bi lahko centri za usklajevanje na podlagi njenega obvestila za javnost z dne 16. julija 2003 upravičeno pričakovali, da se povračilo ne bo zahtevalo za pomoč, do katere so bili dejansko upravičeni do datuma izdaje sodbe Sodišča o vsebini zadeve.
Lastly, the coordination centre scheme is a tax scheme applicable by tax year.
Končno, shema centrov za usklajevanje je davčna shema, ki se uporablja za posamezno proračunsko leto.
Now, in many cases, the tax year corresponds to the calendar year.
Tako v številnih primerih proračunsko leto ustreza koledarskemu letu.
Since the judgment was delivered in mid-2006, the Commission takes the view that the principle of legitimate expectation must apply for each enterprise concerned until the end of the normal tax period running on the date of the judgment.
Ker je bila sodba izdana sredi leta 2006, Komisija meni, da se mora uporabiti načelo upravičenega pričakovanja za vsa zadevna podjetja do konca običajnega davčnega obdobja, ki se na datum sprejetja sodbe še ni izteklo.
Situation of the coordination centres with an authorisation that was renewed prior to notification of Decision 2003/757/EC
Položaj centrov za usklajevanje, katerih potrditev je bila obnovljena pred vročitvijo Odločbe 2003/757/ES