natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
As of 1 January 2004, the amended Tax Administration Act limited the possibility to request a tax deferral to only once a year.
S 1. januarjem 2004 je spremenjeni Zakon o davčni službi omejil možnost prošnje za odlog davka na samo enkrat letno.
The beneficiary used this opportunity for the December 2003 excise duty payable in January 2004.
Upravičenec je to priložnost izkoristil za trošarino za december 2003, zapadlo januarja 2004.
However, it was not able to pay or have deferred the January 2004 excise duty payable on 25 February 2004.
Vendar pa ni mogel plačati ali odložiti plačila trošarine za januar 2004, zapadle 25. februarja 2004.
As a result, the beneficiary became an indebted company within the meaning of the Bankruptcy Act.
Zaradi tega je upravičenec postal zadolžena družba v skladu z Zakonom o stečaju.
It also lost its licence for the production and processing of spirit.
Izgubil je tudi dovoljenje za proizvodnjo in predelavo žganih pijač.
On 8 March 2004 the beneficiary applied to the competent regional court for the arrangement procedure.
Dne 8. marca 2004 je upravičenec na pristojnem okrožnem sodišču zaprosil za postopek dogovora.
Having determined that all the necessary legal requirements were met, the regional court decided by a decision of 29 April 2004 to allow the arrangement procedure to go ahead.
Okrožno sodišče je po ugotovitvi, da so izpolnjene vse potrebne zakonske zahteve, z odločbo z dne 29. aprila 2004 dovolilo začetek postopka dogovora.
At the hearing on 9 July 2004 the creditors voted in favour of the arrangement proposed by the beneficiary.
Na obravnavi dne 9. julija 2004 so upniki glasovali za dogovor, ki ga je predlagal upravičenec.
The arrangement was confirmed on 14 July 2004 by a decision of the supervising regional court.
Dogovor je bil potrjen 14. julija 2004 z odločbo nadzornega okrožnega sodišča.
In August 2004 the tax office appealed against this confirmatory decision of the court.
Avgusta 2004 se je davčni urad pritožil zoper to pritrdilno odločitev sodišča.
By a decision of 25 October 2004, the Supreme Court decided that the appeal was not admissible and declared the decision of the regional court approving the arrangement to be valid and enforceable as of 23 July 2004.
Vrhovno sodišče je z odločbo z dne 25. oktobra 2004 sklenilo, da pritožba ni dopustna, in razglasilo odločbo okrožnega sodišča, s katero je bil dogovor odobren, za veljavno in izvršljivo s 23. julijem 2004.
The public prosecutor subsequently appealed against the decision of the regional court under the extraordinary further appeal procedure.
Javni tožilec se je kasneje pritožil zoper odločbo okrožnega sodišča v nadaljnjem pritožbenem postopku z izrednimi pravnimi sredstvi.
The procedure is still pending before the Supreme Court.
Ta postopek še vedno teče pred vrhovnim sodiščem.
The creditors, including the tax office, agreed with the beneficiary on the following arrangement: 35 % of the debt would be repaid by the beneficiary within one month from the validity of the agreement and the remaining 65 % of the debt would be forgone by the creditors.
Upniki, vključno z davčnim uradom, so z upravičencem sklenili naslednji dogovor: 35 % dolga naj bi upravičenec poplačal v roku enega meseca od začetka veljavnosti sporazuma, preostalim 65 % dolga pa naj bi se upniki odrekli.
All the creditors were therefore treated on identical terms.
Vsi upniki so bili torej obravnavani pod enakimi pogoji.
The actual amounts per creditor are shown in the following table.
Dejanski zneski po posameznih upnikih so prikazani v naslednji preglednici.
The state of the debts of the beneficiary before and after the arrangement procedure [SKK]
Stanje dolgov upravičenca pred postopkom dogovora in po njem[SKK]
Debt before the arrangement
Dolg pred dogovorom
Debt after the arrangement [8]
Dolg po dogovoru [8]
The claims of the tax office included in the arrangement procedure amounted to SKK 640793831 (EUR 16,86 million) and comprised unpaid excise duties for the period May 2003–March 2004, VAT for the period January-April 2004 and added penalties and interest.
Terjatve davčnega urada, vključene v postopek dogovora, so znašale 640793831 SKK (16,86 milijona EUR) in so vsebovale neplačane trošarine za obdobje od maja 2003 do marca 2004, DDV za obdobje od januarja do aprila 2004 ter dodane penale in obresti.
The claims forgone by the tax office amounted to SKK 416515990 (EUR 11 million).
Terjatve, ki jih je davčni urad odpisal, so znašale 416515990 SKK (11 milijonov EUR).
The arrangement provided the tax office with SKK 224277841 (EUR 5,86 million).
Davčnemu uradu je v skladu z dogovorom pripadlo 224277841 SKK (5,86 milijona EUR).
In the arrangement procedure the tax office acted as a separate creditor and, as such, voted separately in favour of the arrangement.
V postopku dogovora je davčni urad deloval kot posamezni upnik in je kot tak ločeno glasoval za dogovor.
The privileged position of the tax office was due to the fact that some of its receivables included in the arrangement procedure were secured in connection with the deferral of the beneficiary's tax debt in 2002 and 2003 (see paragraph 17).
Davčni urad je imel privilegiran položaj zato, ker je bilo nekaj njegovih terjatev, ki so bile vključene v postopek dogovora, zavarovanih v zvezi z odlogom davčnega dolga upravičenca v letih 2002 in 2003 (glej odstavek 17).
All the other creditors voted in favour of the proposed arrangement.
Vsi preostali upniki so glasovali za predlagani dogovor.
Their receivables were common trade receivables not secured in any manner.
Njihove terjatve so bile navadne poslovne terjatve in niso bile zavarovane na nikakršen način.
In its arrangement proposal, in accordance with the requirements of the Bankruptcy Act, the beneficiary spelt out reorganisation measures relating to production, distribution and the workforce (including redundancies).
Upravičenec je v svojem predlogu za dogovor v skladu z zahtevami Zakona o stečaju navedel sanacijske ukrepe v zvezi s proizvodnjo, distribucijo in delovno silo (vključno s presežki).
On the organisational and workforce fronts, the beneficiary planned the following measures: creation of a universal production group for all the production activities, reorganisation of its transport facilities by exclusion of vehicles with the lowest residual value and reorganisation of commercial activities.
Na področjih organizacije in delovne sile je upravičenec načrtoval naslednje ukrepe: ustanovitev splošne proizvodne skupine za vse proizvodne dejavnosti, reorganizacijo prevoznih zmogljivosti z izločitvijo vozil z najnižjo preostalo vrednostjo in reorganizacijo trgovinskih dejavnosti.
These measures were to be accompanied by the redundancy of 50 employees in March-May 2004.
Poleg teh ukrepov naj bi bilo v obdobju od marca do maja 2004 odpuščenih 50 presežnih delavcev.
Over the same period, a further 50 employees were to work on 60 % remuneration.
Nadaljnjih 50 delavcev naj bi v tem obdobju prejemalo 60 % plačilo.
In the production and technical area, the beneficiary stated that, since the company had lost its licence for the production of spirit, the related production facilities would be rented out as of April 2004.
Glede proizvodnega in tehničnega področja je upravičenec navedel, da bodo zadevni proizvodni obrati od aprila 2004 dani v najem, ker je družba izgubila dovoljenje za proizvodnjo žganih pijač.
The beneficiary planned to reduce or cease production of some unprofitable non-alcoholic beverages and stated that any introduction of a new product in this category would be preceded by an analysis of its profitability.
Upravičenec je načrtoval zmanjšanje ali opustitev proizvodnje nekaterih nedonosnih brezalkoholnih pijač in navedel, da bo pred vsakršno uvedbo novih izdelkov v tej kategoriji opravljena analiza njihove donosnosti.
The beneficiary also mentions the following measures: the cost restructuring that should result from lower production costs following the abandonment of the production of spirit and from the abolition of part of the company's own transport and the sale of old equipment for scrap.
Upravičenec navaja tudi naslednje ukrepe: prestrukturiranje stroškov, ki naj bi bilo posledica nižjih proizvodnih stroškov zaradi opustitve proizvodnje žganih pijač in odprave dela lastnih prevoznih sredstev družbe ter prodaje stare opreme za odpadni material.
The beneficiary also planned to sell an administrative building, a shop and a recreational facility and mentioned the possibility of selling or letting out the vinegar production facility.
Upravičenec je načrtoval tudi prodajo upravne zgradbe, trgovine in rekreacijskega objekta, navedel pa je tudi možnost prodaje ali oddajanja obrata za proizvodnjo kisa.
In their comments on the decision to open the formal investigation procedure, the Slovak authorities confirmed that the sale of the administrative building, shop and recreational facility had not taken place.
Slovaški organi so v pripombah na odločitev o sprožitvi formalnega postopka preiskave potrdili, da prodaja upravne zgradbe, trgovine in rekreacijskega objekta ni bila opravljena.
The beneficiary planned an intensive sale of its stocks of ready-to-sell products.
Upravičenec je načrtoval intenzivno prodajo svojih zalog izdelkov, pripravljenih za prodajo.
According to this proposal, the beneficiary was to finance the arrangement through its own resources (sale of stocks) of SKK [less than 150] million and through external financing in the form of a loan from a commercial bank of SKK 100 million.
V skladu s tem predlogom naj bi upravičenec financiral dogovor z lastnimi sredstvi (prodaja zalog) v višini [manj kot 150] milijonov SKK in z zunanjim financiranjem v obliki posojila poslovne banke v višini 100 milijonov SKK.
From the information submitted by the beneficiary in response to the opening of the formal investigation, the outstanding debt was eventually covered by the revenue from the issue of new shares (SKK 21 million; EUR 0,56 million), the revenue from the sale of stock (SKK [less than 150] million; EUR [less than 3,9] million) and a supplier loan from Old Herold s.r.o.
Po informacijah, ki jih je upravičenec predložil v odgovoru na sprožitev formalne preiskave, je bil neporavnani dolg nazadnje poravnan s prihodki od izdaje novih delnic (21 milijonov SKK; 0,56 milijona EUR), s prihodki od prodaje zalog ([manj kot 150] milijonov SKK; [manj kot 3,9] milijona EUR) in posojilom dobavitelja družbe Old Herold s.r.o.
(SKK [70-130] million; EUR [1,8-3,4] million).
([70–130] milijonov SKK; [1,8–3,4] milijona EUR).
The maturity of the invoices of Old Herold s.r.o. was 40 days, which, according to the beneficiary, was a long period considering the beneficiary's precarious financial situation.
Zapadlost računov družbe Old Herold s.r.o. je bila 40 dni, kar je bilo po mnenju upravičenca dolgo obdobje glede na njegovo negotovo finančno stanje.
This prolonged maturity permitted the beneficiary to accumulate the necessary cash.
Upravičencu je podaljšana zapadlost omogočila zbrati potrebna denarna sredstva.
The Slovak authorities informed the Commission after the opening of the formal investigation that the outstanding debt of the beneficiary towards the tax office amounting to SKK 224277841 was paid on 17 December 2004.
Slovaški organi so Komisijo po sprožitvi formalne preiskave obvestili, da je bil neporavnani dolg upravičenca v višini 224277841 SKK davčnemu uradu plačan 17. decembra 2004.
They confirmed that they had suspended the debt write-off agreed in the arrangement procedure pending the procedure before the European Commission.
Potrdili so, da so zadržali odpis dolga, sprejet v postopku dogovora, dokler teče postopek pred Evropsko komisijo.
DECISION TO INITIATE PROCEEDINGS UNDER ARTICLE 88(2) OF THE EC TREATY
ODLOČITEV O SPROŽITVI POSTOPKA NA PODLAGI ČLENA 88(2) POGODBE ES
In its decision to initiate the formal investigation, the Commission raised doubts that the disputed write-off did not involve state aid.
Komisija je v svoji odločitvi za sprožitev formalne preiskave izrazila pomisleke, da sporni odpis ni vključeval državne pomoči.
Specifically, it considered that the behaviour of the tax office in the arrangement procedure did not meet the market economy creditor test.
Predvsem je menila, da vedenje davčnega urada v postopku dogovora ni zadovoljilo preizkusa upnika v tržnem gospodarstvu.
In particular, it found that the tax office was in a situation legally different from the other creditors, as it possessed secured claims and had the possibility to initiate the tax execution procedure.
Zlasti je ugotovila, da je bil davčni urad v drugačnem pravnem položaju kot drugi upniki, ker so bile njegove terjatve zavarovane in bi lahko sprožil postopek davčne izvršbe.
It doubted that the arrangement procedure led to the best possible outcome for the State, when compared with the bankruptcy procedure or the tax execution procedure.
Podvomila je, da je bil postopek dogovora, v primerjavi s stečajnim postopkom ali postopkom davčne izvršbe, najboljša možna rešitev za državo.
The Commission then raised doubts as to the compatibility of the disputed aid with the common market.
Komisija je nato izrazila pomisleke glede združljivosti sporne pomoči s skupnim trgom.
It first raised doubts that the aid could be considered to be compatible as rescue aid, as the Slovak authorities had claimed.
Najprej je izrazila pomisleke glede tega, da bi pomoč veljala za združljivo kot pomoč za reševanje, kot so trdili slovaški organi.
Rescue aid can only be liquidity support in the form of loan guarantees or loans.
Pomoč za reševanje je lahko samo podpora za likvidnost v obliki garancij za posojila ali posojil.
The disputed measure, however, is a debt write-off, which corresponds to a non-refundable grant.
Pri spornem ukrepu pa gre za odpis dolga, kar ustreza nevračljivi donaciji.
In addition, the measure was not granted with the prospect that the beneficiary would present a restructuring plan or a liquidation plan or reimburse the aid in full within six months of authorisation of the rescue measure.
Poleg tega ukrep ni bil odobren v pričakovanju, da bo upravičenec predstavil načrt za prestrukturiranje ali likvidacijo ali da bo povrnil pomoč v celoti v roku šestih mesecev od odobritve ukrepa za reševanje.
The Commission then considered the compatibility of the disputed measure as restructuring aid and raised doubts as to whether two of the main conditions were fulfilled: the existence of a restructuring plan ensuring the return to long-term viability within a reasonable time-frame and the limitation of the aid to the minimum necessary.
Komisija je nato proučila združljivost spornega ukrepa kot pomoči za prestrukturiranje in izrazila pomisleke glede izpolnjevanja dveh glavnih pogojev: obstoja načrta za prestrukturiranje, s katerim se zagotavlja vrnitev dolgoročne sposobnosti preživetja v ustreznem času, in omejitve na najnižjo potrebno pomoč.
In addition to the facts described in Part II above, the beneficiary submitted the following comments.
Poleg dejstev, navedenih v delu II, je upravičenec predložil naslednje pripombe.
The beneficiary argues that the reason for its financial difficulties at the beginning of 2004 was the change of the Tax Administration Act, which restricted the possibility to request the deferral of taxes to once a year.
Upravičenec trdi, da je njegove finančne težave na začetku leta 2004 povzročila sprememba Zakona o davčni službi, s katero se je možnost zaprositve za odlog davkov omejila na enkrat letno.
This was an important change for the beneficiary, which had, in his own words, been relying on this possibility in previous years.
Za upravičenca, ki se je po lastnih trditvah v prejšnjih letih zanašal na to možnost, je bila to bistvena sprememba.
On the merits of the case itself, the beneficiary first submitted that the Commission did not have jurisdiction to review the contested measure because the measure was put into effect before the date of accession and was not applicable after accession.
Glede vsebine same zadeve je upravičenec sprva trdil, da Komisija ni pristojna za preverjanje izpodbijanega ukrepa, ker je ukrep začel veljati pred datumom pristopa in se ni uporabljal po pristopu.
The measure is claimed to have been put into effect before accession because the arrangement procedure was initiated on 8 March 2004 and, as the beneficiary submits, approved by the court on 29 April 2004, i.e. before the accession of the Slovak Republic to the European Union.
Ukrep naj bi začel veljati pred pristopom, ker se je postopek dogovora začel 8. marca 2004, sodišče pa ga je po trditvah upravičenca odobrilo 29. aprila 2004, torej pred pristopom Slovaške republike k Evropski uniji.
Furthermore, the tax authorities are said to have signalled their agreement to the proposed arrangement in the negotiations preceding the initiation of the arrangement procedure.
Poleg tega naj bi davčni organi potrdili svoje strinjanje s predlaganim dogovorom v pogajanjih pred začetkom postopka dogovora.
A meeting with the Tax Directorate of the Slovak Republic took place in December 2003, and on 3 February 2004 the local tax office sent the beneficiary a letter in which it allegedly confirmed the possibility of proceeding by way of an arrangement.
Sestanek z Davčno upravo Slovaške republike je potekal decembra 2003, lokalni davčni urad pa je 3. februarja 2004 poslal upravičencu dopis, v katerem naj bi domnevno potrdil možnost postopka dogovora.
The beneficiary further submitted that, even if the Commission found itself competent to act, the contested measure did not constitute state aid because the market economy creditor principle was met.
Upravičenec je poleg tega trdil, da izpodbijani ukrep, tudi če Komisija meni, da je pristojna za ukrepanje, ni bil državna pomoč, ker je bilo upoštevano načelo upnika v tržnem gospodarstvu.
First, the beneficiary submits that the comparison of the arrangement procedure with the tax execution procedure is misleading because the initiation of the former excludes or suspends the latter.
Prvič, upravičenec trdi, da je primerjava postopka dogovora s postopkom davčne izvršbe zavajajoča, ker sprožitev prvega postopka izključuje ali prekine drugi postopek.
The tax execution procedure was not, therefore, an option for the tax office.
Zato davčni urad ni izbral možnosti postopka davčne izvršbe.
In addition, according to the beneficiary, had it not voluntarily initiated the arrangement procedure, after some weeks or months it would have had a legal obligation to launch the bankruptcy procedure or an arrangement procedure pursuant to the insolvency legislation.
Poleg tega upravičenec navaja, da bi imel, če ne bi prostovoljno sprožil postopka dogovora, čez nekaj tednov ali mesecev pravno obveznost sprožitve stečajnega postopka ali postopka dogovora v skladu z zakonodajo o nesolventnosti.
Second, the beneficiary submits that the decision of the State to avoid bankruptcy and instead to seek a solution through the arrangement procedure met the market economy creditor test.
Drugič, upravičenec trdi, da je odločitev države, da se izogne stečaju in namesto tega poišče rešitev v postopku dogovora, zadovoljila preizkus upnika v tržnem gospodarstvu.
By way of evidence, it submits statements from two auditors and one bankruptcy receiver that the tax office would receive more and would receive it more quickly under the arrangement procedure than under the bankruptcy procedure.
Kot dokazilo je predložil izjave dveh revizorjev in stečajnega upravitelja, da bi davčni urad prejel več in hitreje v postopku dogovora kot v postopku stečaja.
It also submits further material and statistics to demonstrate that the bankruptcy procedure in Slovakia lasts on average 3-7 years and brings only a very limited return from the sale of assets.
Poleg tega je predložil dodatno gradivo in statistične podatke, ki kažejo, da stečajni postopek na Slovaškem traja povprečno od 3 do 7 let, iztržek od prodaje premoženja pa je precej omejen.
The beneficiary bases his analysis mainly on a report by the auditing company EKORDA dated 7 July 2004, which the tax office allegedly had at its disposal before the creditors' vote on 9 July 2004.
Analiza upravičenca temelji predvsem na poročilu revizijske družbe EKORDA z dne 7. julija 2004, ki naj bi ga davčni urad domnevno imel na voljo pred glasovanjem upnikov 9. julija 2004.
No evidence, however, was submitted showing that this was indeed the case.
Vendar pa ni bilo predloženo nobeno dokazilo, ki bi to dejansko potrjevalo.
According to the report by EKORDA, the revenue from the sale of assets in the case of bankruptcy would be, at best, SKK 204 million (EUR 5,3 million), and, after deduction of various fees of SKK 45 million, only SKK 159 million (EUR 4,2 million).
Po poročilu revizijske družbe EKORDA naj bi prihodek od prodaje premoženja v primeru stečaja v najboljšem primeru znašal 204 milijone SKK (5,3 milijona EUR), po odbitku različnih pristojbin v višini 45 milijonov SKK pa samo 159 milijonov SKK (4,2 milijona EUR).
The beneficiary himself corrected the amount of the fees to be deducted (SKK 36 million) and arrived at the figure of SKK 168 million (EUR 4,4 million).
Upravičenec je sam popravil znesek pristojbin, ki naj bi bile odbite (36 milijonov SKK), in izračunal znesek 168 milijonov SKK (4,4 milijona EUR).
Even though the tax office as the only separate creditor and by far the largest creditor would receive most of this revenue, it would still be less than what the tax office received after the arrangement.
Čeprav bi davčni urad kot edini posamezni in daleč največji upnik prejel večino tega prihodka, bi to bilo še vedno manj od tega, kar je prejel po dogovoru.
To arrive at this result, EKORDA used as the basis the book value as at 31 March 2004 of fixed assets, stocks, cash and short-term receivables after adjustment, reflecting their unrecoverability and low value.
Revizijska družba EKORDA je do tega rezultata prišla na podlagi knjigovodske vrednosti osnovnih sredstev, zalog, denarnih sredstev in kratkoročnih poslovnih terjatev po prilagoditvi dne 31. marca 2004, iz katere sta razvidni njihova neizterljivost in nizka vrednost.
It adjusted the nominal value of the beneficiary's assets by a so-called liquidation factor for each component of the assets in the event of sale under bankruptcy proceedings (45 % for fixed assets, 20 % for stocks and short-term receivables, and 100 % for cash).
Nominalno vrednost sredstev upravičenca je prilagodila s tako imenovanim likvidacijskim faktorjem za vse sestavne dele sredstev v primeru prodaje v stečajnem postopku (45 % za osnovna sredstva, 20 % za zaloge in kratkoročne poslovne terjatve ter 100 % za denarna sredstva).
EKORDA mentions the future tax revenue accruing from the operation of the beneficiary as well as the employment trend in the region and the trend in the food-processing industry in Slovakia as very important factors affecting the decision to keep the beneficiary in business.
Revizijska družba EKORDA navaja prihodnji davčni prihodek iz dejavnosti upravičenca, gibanje na področju zaposlovanja v regiji in gibanje živilskopredelovalne industrije na Slovaškem kot zelo pomembne dejavnike pri odločitvi, da se ohrani dejavnost upravičenca.
The beneficiary also mentions two other reports.
Upravičenec navaja tudi dve drugi poročili.
The auditor Marta Kochová concluded that the maximum revenue from the sale of the assets, which, however, were not evaluated, would be SKK 100 million (EUR 2,6 million) or, after deduction of fees of SKK 22 million, only SKK 78 million (EUR 2 million).
Revizorka Marta Kochová je ugotovila, da bi najvišji možni prihodek od prodaje premoženja, ki pa ni bilo ocenjeno, znašal 100 milijonov SKK (2,6 milijona EUR), po odbitku pristojbin v višini 22 milijonov SKK pa samo 78 milijonov SKK (2 milijona EUR).
No further information on this report was provided.
Dodatne informacije o tem poročilu niso bile predložene.
The receiver Mrs Holovačová is said to state that, in her opinion, the arrangement procedure is generally more advantageous for creditors than bankruptcy.
Stečajna upraviteljica ga. Holovačová naj bi navedla, da je po njenem mnenju postopek dogovora na splošno bolj ugoden za upnike kot stečaj.